SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Del) 1339

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, A.K. CHAWLA, JJ.
Ruchika Singh Chhabra – Appellant
Versus
M/s. AIR France India and Another – Respondents
LPA No. 237 of 2018, C.M. Application Nos. 16802-16803 of 2018
Decided On : 30-05-2018

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : Ms. Nandita Rao, Ms. Srilina Roy.
For the Respondents: Sh. Manish Dembla, Sh. Nachiketa Goyal, Ms. Manika Tripathy Pandey, Sh. Ashutosh Kaushik, Ms. Raveena Tandon.

Headnote:

Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 - Section 4 - Workplace - Sexual harassment - Threat of termination - Jurisdiction of - Appellants' appointment letter was issued by Air France's office at Delhi - Letter of resignation was coerced from her in Delhi - Cause of action is directly related to the constitution and functioning of the ICC - Since the ICC has been constituted both for the Delhi as well as the Gurgaon office - Delhi office being the registered office of Air France in India, all these facts constitute direct nexus to the cause of action in this case - Mere fact that the FIR was registered in a particular state does not imply that no cause of action has arisen even partly within the territorial limits of another state - Impugned order is set aside.

Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 - Section 4(1)(c) - Service - Termination - Procedure adopted by the ICC - Committee appears to have not conducted the proceedings according to principles of natural justice - No charges were framed by the ICC - Independent witnesses admitted to having read the evidence of the accused - Yet, they were not disqualified - Appellant was forced to cross examine and be cross examined by the accused - There was apparent unresponsiveness on the part of Respondent no. 1 in dealing with the complaint - Sudden termination of employment of the Appellant also raises concerns - Constitution of the ICC by Air France and all its resultant proceedings, including the report submitted by it, are declared invalid and set aside - It is directed that the ICC should be reconstituted in strict compliance and the committee should conduct its inquiry afresh.

JUDGMENT :

S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.

1. An unsuccessful writ petitioner appeals to this Court against an order of the learned single judge dated 30.01.2018 (in W.P. (C) No. 1382/2016).

2. The facts of the case are that Ruchika Singh Chabra (the appellant, hereafter “Appellant”) joined the first respondent (hereafter “the first Respondent” or “Air France”) in the year 2001 as Commercial Assistant. She alleges to having become a victim of sexual harassment by a certain employee, Stanislas Brun (hereafter “Brun”) a French National, currently serving as Managing Director of Air France, who was transferred to India as Marketing Manager, Cargo (India, Nepal and Bhutan) in 2013.The Appellant alleges to being harassed by Brun on multiple occasions and cited several incidents supporting her averment that she was subjected to repeated sexual advances inspite of her repeated or express refusal.

3. The Appellant finally confided in two people from Air France at a meeting in Delhi. She alleged that in order to victimise her for complaining against incidents of Sexual Harassment, she was compelled to submit her resignation on 23.09.2017 by three people in Air France and claims that this was under the threat of immediate termination along with being threatened against getting any letter or documents of service and provident fund/gratuity from the company. She alleges that when she tried resisting, she was gheraoed and molested by three male senior executives who got the resignation letter scribed and signed by her for reporting against her senior. After getting the resignation forcefully signed, she was asked to leave the premises within maximum half an hour without her belongings. When she requested them to collect her personal belongings and data she was blatantly refused. The Appellant after coming out of her confinement was compelled to call the Women Helpline and requested the police to come to her office. The police then came to the office and took her to the Police Station at Gurgaon and thereafter she lodged FIR No. 550/15 with DLF Police Station, Gurgaon.

4. The Appellant also lodged a complaint with the Internal Complaints Committee (“ICC”) Air France on 26.09.2015 constituted in terms of Section 4 of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (hereinafter “the Workplace Harassment Prohibition Act”). In furtherance to the aforesaid complaint, the Appellant also approached the Delhi Commission for Women (hereinafter “Respondent no. 2” or “DCW”) on 30.09.2015 to ensure that a proper ICC is put in place to investigate the complaint of the Appellant.

5. The Appellant contended that the constitution of the said Committee is contrary to the provisions of the POSH Act as the external member appointed on the committee was not associated with a non-governmental organization and his qualifications have not been informed to her until much later in the course of the proceedings of the ICC. She also contends that the procedure followed by the ICC is not in accordance with law. The Appellant alleged that despite repeated submissions of complaints to the ICC via email by her, the ICC was not set up according to law and she was informed that the attachments in the email were inaccessible. The Appellant avers that she wrote several emails requesting the ICC to set up a personal hearing/meeting and also to inform her of the members constituting the ICC, including the details of the independent NGO member so as to facilitate her complaint.

6. The Appellant received an email from the ICC on 06.11.2015, about the names of the members constituting the ICC being Ms. Taruna Jain, Ms. Himanshu Sharma, Mr. Jeff Anthony and she was also informed about the nomination of Mr. Michael Dias, Secretary, the Employers' Association, Delhi as the external member on account of having the necessary qualifications prescribed under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act/Rules 2013.The





































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top