The appointment of members to the ICC must be in accordance with the provisions of Act No.14 of 2013, which requires that the members should preferably be committed to the cause of women or have experience in social work or have legal knowledge.

(Per B.P. Dharmadhikari, J)

All these petitions raise identical challenges. Petitioner in Writ Petition No. 3449/2013 is working as an Assistant Professor in Geology in Shri Shivaji Science College, Congress Nagar, Nagpur. Her prayer is to quash and set aside the order of transfer dated 25.06.2013, and to direct the respondent no.4 Principal of that College and Respondent no.5 Principal inperson to initiate departmental enquiry against the respondent no.6, who happens to be the Head of the Department of Geology. Enquiry is sought on the ground of her 'sexual harassment'. Prayer clause (ii) in the petition is to direct the respondent nos. 1 to 3 to constitute Internal Complaints Committee under Section 4 of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “the 2013 Act” for short). This Court has granted interim orders of status-quo, but according to the employer the petitioner was already relieved.

Respondent no.1 in the petition is the University to which the respondent no.3 College is affiliated. While respondent no.2 is the Joint Director of Higher and Technical Education of State of Maharashtra. Writ Petition No. 3450/2013 is against very same employer by a different lady working as Assistant Professor in the department of Physical Education. She has joined wife of the Principal by name as respondent no.6. Said wife also works as Assistant Professor in the department of Chemistry in very same college. Prayers made by this petitioner are identical.

Writ Petition No.3451/2013, is by third lady who is working as Assistant Professor in Mathematics. First five respondents in the earlier two petitions are the respondents in this petition. Prayers made therein are again identical.

2. Parties have completed their arguments on the preliminary points on 25.02.2014. After hearing the respective Counsel on that date, this Court has passed the following order. “ The parties have addressed Court on issues relating to composition of Internal Complaints Committee, Procedure followed by it, the propriety or validity of submissions of two reports; one by Presiding Officer and second by other three members, and on question whether President, Secretary of the Society administering the college and Principal of the College can be subjected to jurisdiction of Internal Complaints Committee as according to these respondents they are covered by definition of phrase “Employer” in the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013. Accordingly, we close the matter for considering this issue and for passing suitable orders in three Writ Petitions thereafter. Needless to mention that question of perversity of findings recorded in Enquiry Reports or then, whether allegations constitute sexual harassment are kept open and can be looked into after these orders are passed.”

3. To understand why this course of splitting of the hearing became necessary, the fact that this Court has to consider the report of Internal Complaints Committee on grievance of petitioners about sexual harassment, that the Presiding Officer and Chairman of the said Committee Smt. Madhugiri has submitted a separate report in a sealed envelope, while its other three members submitted their joint report and that there is also a challenge to procedure adopted by it, need to be kept in mind. N.G.O. member Smt. Pankule, has submitted her report along with these two Members.

4. In all these Writ Petitions, on 18.12.2013, after hearing the respective Counsel, this Court has passed the following order :“ Heard Shri R. Deo and Shri S.P. Bhandarkar, learned Counsel for respective petitioners, Shri C.S. Kaptan, Senior Counsel with Shri A.R. Sambre, learned Counsel for respondent nos. 4 and 5, Ms. T. Khan, learned Counsel for respondent University, learned A.G.P. for respondent Joint Director Higher and Technical Education and Mrs. T.D. Khade, learned Counsel for Dr. Shah, He