A dispute involving alleged workplace discrimination, physical assault, and immigration misconduct is moving forward after the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal denied applications to delay the case. 

Anil Khurana, the complainant, accuses several individuals and a company of exploiting his immigration status and place of origin to mistreat him at work. The complaint was filed on Jan. 19, 2024, against Global SD Immigration Services Ltd., its representatives Surjit Singh Sandhu, Simran Dhaliwal, Sarabjeet Deol, and consultant Sanjana Sanjana. Global SD has a City of 91´ó»ÆѼ business licence.

Khurana alleges that Global SD and its associates deceived him into working at a gas station under false promises of restaurant employment, denied him wages, accused him of theft, and physically assaulted him. He also claims the respondents threatened to harm his chances of obtaining permanent residency in Canada and even deport him.

Some respondents requested the Tribunal defer the case, arguing that similar issues are being addressed in Small Claims Court. They say the complaint should be deferred because Khurana filed civil claims against the respondent Global SD and against a numbered company of which Dhaliwal is the sole director. Court documents noted that Khurana’s complaint did not name the numbered company as a respondent. 

Respondents also cited legal restrictions, such as a court order barring Khurana from contacting Sanjana until a specific date in January 2025 as a reason to postpone. However, in a December 2024 decision, the Tribunal found that the complaint raises distinct issues that the Small Claims Court cannot resolve, such as allegations of discrimination based on Khurana’s origin.

While recognizing the emotional strain on Sanjana due to the ongoing legal matters, the Tribunal emphasized that her concerns do not justify halting the case.

The Tribunal pointed out that delaying the case would not serve fairness or efficiency, especially since Khurana's claims in the other proceedings focus on damages for assault and emotional distress, not discrimination. 

Respondents must now respond to the allegations, and the Tribunal will proceed with examining the claims. No findings have been made yet, and the case is in its early stages.

Khurana seeks compensation for lost wages, emotional harm, and damages to his dignity, as well as measures to address workplace discrimination. He is asking for $740 for five days of termination pay, $12,500 for intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress, $12,500 for assault, and $5,000 for aggravated and punitive damages.

None of the accusations have been proven in court.