New Delhi, Sep 8 (IANS) The Delhi High Court has disposed of a contempt petition filed by a senior professor of Jamia Millia Islamia after the university assured that separate toilets would be designated exclusively for female faculty members, including female persons with disabilities (PwDs), at the institution.
A single-judge bench of Justice Mini Pushkarna took note of the varsity’s statement that a toilet on the second floor of the building would be designated exclusively for female faculty members and female PwD, while separate arrangements would be made for male PWD.
The Delhi High Court was hearing a contempt petition filed by Prof Sujata Ashwarya alleging non-compliance with the judicial directions issued earlier in March concerning her grievance over access to a hygienic and reasonably suitable restroom facility at the university.
During the hearing, counsel for the petitioner highlighted that a toilet on the second floor of the building had been designated for female faculty members and PwDs but was being made available to both men and women. Advocate Mrinmoi Chatterjee submitted that the facility should instead be reserved exclusively for women.
On instructions, counsel appearing for Jamia Millia Islamia submitted that the second-floor toilet would be designated exclusively for female faculty members and female PwDs. “The aforesaid statement is taken note of,” Justice Pushkarna said in the order passed last week.
The order also recorded the university’s assurance that the facility would be made available within one week and that separate arrangements would be made for male PwDs.
The High Court further clarified that the exclusive toilet earmarked for female faculty members would be available to all female faculty members and that “no particular person shall be allowed to put any lock and key on the said toilet”.
“In view of the aforesaid, no further orders are required to be passed in the present petition,” the Delhi High Court said, disposing of the contempt proceedings.
The dispute traces back to Professor Ashwarya’s complaint regarding a restroom at Jamia’s Centre for West Asian Studies. She had sought designation of a standalone restroom as a ladies’ toilet, citing hygiene concerns and a medical difficulty that made use of certain facilities difficult.
In its order passed on March 13, the High Court had observed that the matter concerned a workplace grievance which “ought never to have travelled beyond the administrative corridors” of the university, involving a woman’s request for a restroom facility in the context of hygiene and her stated medical difficulty.
The order had recorded that Prof Ashwarya, a senior professor with over two decades of service, had been using a restroom at the Centre for West Asian Studies, but access to the facility was subsequently regulated, and the conditions of hygiene allegedly deteriorated when it was opened for common use.
She had sought designation of a standalone restroom as a ladies’ toilet, stating that it had a western-style commode and that this was necessary for her because of a knee condition that made squatting difficult. The university had thereafter initiated disciplinary action against her, including a show-cause notice, constitution of a committee and an office order requiring her to submit a written apology.
The Delhi High Court, while quashing those actions, had said that the university’s response appeared to have “lost sight of” the distinction between institutional discipline and addressing a grievance concerning hygiene and dignity.
“A complaint of this nature called for engagement, not escalation,” Justice Sanjeev Narula had observed.
The High Court had held that access to clean, usable and dignified restroom facilities formed part of “elementary working conditions” and directed Jamia Millia Islamia administration to reconsider Prof Ashwarya’s grievance with due sensitivity to hygiene, privacy, dignity and her stated medical condition.
The university subsequently approached the High Court seeking review of the March 13 order, contending, among other things, that adequate sanitation facilities existed and that remedial steps had already been taken. The review petition was dismissed by Justice Narula on April 15, with the High Court holding that the university had failed to demonstrate any error apparent on the face of the record warranting review.
The Delhi High Court had observed that if the university had taken effective steps in compliance with the earlier directions, the parties could work out the consequences of such compliance in accordance with law, while the remedies would remain open to the petitioner if she maintained that there had been no effective compliance.
The latest order records the university’s assurances regarding exclusive restroom facilities for female faculty members and separate arrangements for male PwDs, bringing the contempt proceedings to an end.
–IANS
pds/uk
