AUT alleges ICCs at Periyar University in Salem not composed as per PoSH Act and UGC regulations
ICC, a committee mandated by the PoSH Act, should be established within an organisation to address and resolve complaints of sexual harassment in the workplace. Its prime goal is to ensure a safe and respectful working environment, especially for women. The UGC issued guidelines for the composition and constitution of an ICC committee in a university in 2015.
As per the guidelines, a presiding officer should be a woman faculty member, not below the rank of professor. Persons in senior administrative positions such as Vice-Chancellor, Registrar, Dean, syndicate member, and head of the departments (HoD) shall not be members of ICCs to ensure the autonomy of their functioning.
The AUT alleges these rules are violated brazenly and ICCs are used as a tool to victimise not-so-preferred teachers and employees.
The AUT general secretary, K. Raja, said that the first ICC committee at Periyar University was constituted only in July 2018 with T. Poongodi Vijayakumar as the presiding officer. She was the HoD when she assumed the role and was also a syndicate member between 2019 and 2022. As per the rule, this is a serious violation.
The second and third ICCs (April 21 and 24, 2022) were headed by T. Periasamy. This was also a violation, as the ICC presiding officer should be female. The fourth committee was headed by R. Parimalavalli (April 28, 2022), an associate professor, which again, is a violation, as a presiding officer should not be below the rank of professor.
From July 2022 to May 2025, Ms. Poongodi, once again headed the fifth, sixth, and seventh ICCs as the presiding officer. Except for three months, she has been in the position for the past seven years, while UGC says no one can be a member of the ICC beyond three years.
ICC has also not provided the details of complaints received in the last seven years. As per available records, ICC punished two faculty members: K. Premkumar, the then general secretary of the Periyar University Teachers Association (PUTA), and another professor. Mr. Premkumar was suspended and later removed from service.
While another professor was awarded a demotion, he got a stay from the court for the issue. Mr. Premkumar is an unpreferred teacher, as he allegedly raised his voice against the Periyar University administration's wrongdoing as PUTA's general secretary. If the ICC is constituted against the UGC regulations and PoSH Act, then how will the reports submitted by these committees be valid? Mr. Raja questioned.
Demanding that action taken based on these ICC reports should be revoked, Mr. Raja said the incumbent administration should pay due attention to the conscious violations in the composition and constitution of the ICCs and sensitise the committee by appropriating mandated amendments in accordance with the rules in vogue at the ensuing meeting of the Syndicate, Mr. Raja added.
The member of the Periyar University Vice-Chancellor in-charge Committee, R. Subramani, was not available for a comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
17 minutes ago
- Economic Times
CCI closes startup body's complaint against Google, refrains from probe
The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has decided against launching a probe into the Alliance of Digital India Foundation's (ADIF's) complaint against tech giant Google's alleged anti-competitive practices in the practices in online advertising, and closed the startup body had essentially challenged Google's alleged dominant position and "purportedly abusive behaviour" in the online search advertisement and online display advertisement markets. In an order dated August 1, reviewed by ET, the antitrust regulator, however, said, 'ADIF hasn't pointed out any specific part of any policy or conduct of Google in support of its claim that the allegations made in the present matter also extend to Google's Online Display Advertising services'. 'Therefore, in light of there being no supporting evidence to such claim, the Commission does not deem fit to take cognizance of such claim of ADIF,' it for some other allegations by the ADIF, the regulator said it had addressed similar issues in certain earlier cases and 'no purpose would be served by inquiring into the same issue yet again without there being any material change in circumstances being pointed out'.The regulator added that re-investigating the same issue again 'would simply lead to a wastage of time and resources of the public exchequer'. The Commission has stressed that it has 'examined in detail the averments made by ADIF and the submissions thereto made by Google, on all the issues related to alleged unfair and discriminatory conditions imposed by Google upon advertisers as part of its Google Ads Policies' before reaching its conclusion. It also said that all the four instances of alleged unfair and discriminatory conditions imposed by Google upon advertisers as part of its Google Ads Policies as raised by ADIF in the present matter, 'have already been examined in substance and set to rest by the Commission in its previous decisions in Matrimony case (supra) and/ or Vishal Gupta case (supra)'. 'The Commission is not convinced with the reasons stated by ADIF for distinguishing its allegations from the issues examined in previous orders passed by the Commission. As per the clear language of Section 26(2A) of the Competition Act, the issues examined in the previous order may be 'the same' or 'substantially the same',' it said in the order. 'Therefore, the present matter is directed to be closed forthwith in terms of the provisions of Section 26(2A) of the Act,' it added.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Explosive in house or on bike? Malegaon blast judgement flags gap in probe; raises torture concerns
NEW DELHI: A special NIA court's damning acquittal order in the 2008 Malegaon blast case has exposed major contradictions between the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) and the National Investigation Agency (NIA), raising serious concerns over coercion, flawed evidence, and the legality of the investigation. As per PTI, in the 1,036-page verdict, Special Judge AK Lahoti acquitted all seven accused, including BJP MP Pragya Singh Thakur and Lt Col Prasad Purohit, citing a lack of reliable and conclusive evidence. Contradictory charges: House vs bike The court flagged glaring inconsistencies between ATS and NIA versions of how and where the bomb was assembled. According to the ATS, the RDX device was put together in a house in Pune and then handed to a now-absconding accused. The NIA, however, stated it was fixed onto a motorcycle in Indore and transported via the Sendhawa bus stand. "Thus, there is a material variance in their charge sheets and both the investigation agencies are not consistent with each other on the material aspects like fitting, transporting and involvement of accused," the judge observed, as reported by PTI. The court said the prosecution could not prove the ownership of the explosive-laden motorbike, nor conclusively establish that the blast was caused by the said vehicle. 'The prosecution proved that a blast occurred in Malegaon but failed to prove that bomb was placed in that motorcycle,' the judge said. Torture, coercion, and fabrication of evidence According to PTI, the judgement raised serious concerns over allegations of torture, coercion, and illegal detention of both accused and witnesses by ATS officers. Multiple witnesses testified that their statements were taken under duress and that they were physically assaulted. While prosecution argued that no formal complaints were filed, the court countered that absence of complaints does not invalidate the claims. 'This raises serious concern over the credibility of the evidence collected by the ATS,' it said, noting that similar allegations were not made against NIA officers. The court directed its judgement be sent to the Directors General of both ATS and NIA for appropriate action. Court slams use of UAPA, highlights gaps The court noted that charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) were filed without proper application of mind. The right-wing group 'Abhinav Bharat', allegedly linked to the accused, has never been banned or classified as a terror organisation. The court found no evidence that Purohit had stored or transported RDX from Kashmir, where he was posted, or that he assembled the bomb. It added that though money from Abhinav Bharat may have been used to fund construction of Purohit's home, it did not prove intent to commit terrorism. The acquittal comes 17 years after the September 29, 2008 blast, which killed six and injured over 100 people near a mosque in Malegaon, a communally sensitive town in Maharashtra. The Maharashtra government has been ordered to compensate victims' families with Rs 2 lakh each and injured persons with Rs 50,000.
News18
2 hours ago
- News18
Elon Musk's X Accuses UK Of ‘Censorship' Over Online Safety Laws: 'Free Speech Will Suffer'
Elon Musk's social media platform X criticized the UK's new online safety rules, warning they suppress free expression. Social media platform X (formerly Twitter) criticised UK's new online safety regulations, warning that the laws risk suppressing free expression and amount to state-sponsored censorship. The Elon Musk-owned company said, 'Free speech will suffer. The Act's laudable intentions are at risk of being overshadowed by the breadth of its regulatory reach. Without a more balanced, collaborative approach, free speech will suffer." The criticism comes days after new provisions under the UK's Online Safety Act came into force. Among them is a requirement for websites- including adult and social media platforms- to verify users' ages to prevent children from accessing explicit or violent material. X said it had worked to comply with the new rules, including introducing age verification mechanisms but warned that the threat of significant financial penalties could lead platforms to over-censor. The company said, 'Many are now concerned that a plan ostensibly intended to keep children safe is at risk of seriously infringing on the public's right to free expression." The UK government has defended the legislation as per which companies that fail to comply could face fines of up to £18 million or 10% of global turnover- a figure that could amount to £200 million in X's case. Earlier this week, the UK's media regulator Ofcom said it had begun investigations into dozens of websites that had not introduced required safeguards. It confirmed it had written to US-based firms to remind them of their obligations. X also criticised measures that would enable police to monitor social media for content deemed anti-immigrant, arguing this 'oversteps the intended mission" of child protection. X's criticism echoes comments made by Elon Musk in which he described the Online Safety Act as a 'suppression of the people." He also endorsed a public petition calling for the law's repeal, which has gathered over 450,000 signatures. However, Ofcom insisted the rules do not require platforms to restrict legal content for adults as a spokesperson said, 'They must carefully consider how they protect users' rights to freedom of expression while keeping people safe." Get breaking news, in-depth analysis, and expert perspectives on everything from geopolitics to diplomacy and global trends. Stay informed with the latest world news only on News18. Download the News18 App to stay updated! view comments First Published: Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
