IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J.
Akademi & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
GNCTD & Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(C) 1103/2020 & CM Appln. 3668-69/2020, 7648-50/2020, 9969-70/2020, 18690/2020, 23465/2020, 6416/2021, 13630/2021 & 17420/2021
Decided On : 25-10-2021
Sexual Harassment - Workplace - Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 - Section 16
Fact of the Case:
The aggrieved woman, an employee of the Akademi, filed a petition seeking redressal for sexual harassment and wrongful termination of her services. The court addressed the jurisdiction of the Internal Complaints Committee, the validity of the termination, and the employer's duty to provide a safe working environment.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the Secretary is an employer under Section 2(g) of the Act, and the complaint against him should have been made to the Local Committee, not the Internal Complaints Committee. The termination of the aggrieved woman's services was quashed, and she was reinstated with full back wages and other benefits. The court also directed the Akademi to pay her salary and provide a safe working environment.
Issues: Jurisdiction of Internal Complaints Committee, Validity of Termination, Duty of Employer to Provide Safe Working Environment
Ratio Decidendi: The Secretary is considered an employer under the Act, and the Internal Complaints Committee lacked jurisdiction to entertain the complaint against him. The termination was found to be retaliatory and not in compliance with the Act. The employer has a duty to provide a safe working environment and assist in prosecuting complaints of sexual harassment.
Final Decision: The petition by the aggrieved woman was allowed, and the petition by the Akademi was dismissed. The court reinstated the aggrieved woman, quashed the termination, and directed the Akademi to comply with the Act and provide a safe working environment.
JUDGMENT
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. - In view of Section 16 of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the name of the Petitioner in W.P. (C) 1103 of 2020 shall be kept confidential and she would be referred to as the "aggrieved woman " and similarly the name of the officer against whom complaint has been made shall be kept confidential and he would be referred to as the "Secretary ".
2. Further, in order to conceal the identity of the aggrieved woman and the Secretary, the names of the aggrieved woman and the organisation shall be redacted from the copy of the judgment that is uploaded on the website or made available to third parties. The registry is also directed to redact the name of the aggrieved woman and the organisation from the cause title.
3. The aggrieved woman who is the petitioner in W.P.(C) 1103 of 2020 had originally filed this petition inter alia seeking a direction to the Akademi (for the purposes of confidentiality hereinafter referred to as the "Akademi") to comply with the directions dated 16.12.2019 and 16.01.2020 issued by Local Complaints Committee and to grant her three months paid leave with immediate effect, in addition to the leave she would be otherwise entitled to. She has further sought a direction to the Akademi to comply with Section 19 of the Act and to pay compensation of Rs. 5 lakhs for mental trauma, pain, suffering and emotional distress caused to her.
4. During the Pendency of the petition, because of certain subsequent events, the aggrieved woman sought amendment of the petition, which was allowed and consequently she has, in addition to her earlier prayers sought quashing of the office memorandum dated 14.02.2020 issued by the Akademi terminating her services. She also seeks information about the review committee and the appraisal done with regard to her performance. She also seeks reinstatement to her former position, with continuity of service, full back wages, and other consequential service benefits.
5. The Akademi, by way of its Writ Petition No. W.P. (C) 2546 of 2021 seeks quashing of proceedings initiated by the aggrieved woman before the Local Complaints Committee and also the order dated 16.01.2020 passed by it.
6. The questions that arise for determination in the subject writ petitions are:
(i) Whether the Secretary is an employer in terms of section 2(g) of the Act?; and
(ii) Whether the complaint of sexual harassment against the Secretary could have been made only to the Local Committee and not to the Internal Complaints Committee in terms of Section 6(1) of the Act?; and
(iii) Whether the Internal Complaints Committee was validly constituted in terms of Section 4 of the Act?; and
(iv) Whether the aggrieved woman made any complaint to the Internal Complaints Committee in terms of Section 9 of the Act?' and
(v) If the answer to question (iv) is in the negative, then whether the report of the Internal Complaints Committee dismissing the complaint is sustainable?
(vi) Whether the non confirmation/extension of probation of the aggrieved woman during pendency of the proceedings is sustainable?
(vii) Whether the Petition by the aggrieved woman is not maintainable as she has not exhausted the alternative remedy of an appeal against the finding of the Internal Complaints Committee?
7. The aggrieved woman is from one of the north eastern states and claims to have worked with several prestigious publishing houses.
8. On 26.12.2017, the aggrieved woman was appointed to the post of Editor (English) on probation for a period of two years. As per the letter of appointment during the period of probation her services could be terminated without notice or assigning any reason for the same. The employment is governed by the Akademi (Services) Bye-Laws/Central Civil Services Rules ('Bye-laws').
9. On 09.02.2018 the aggrieved woman was issued a Provisional Appointment Order confirming her appointment to the post of Editor (Eng
Amar Nath Chowdhury Versus Braithwaite and Company Ltd. (2002) 2 SCC 290
State of Uttar Pradesh Versus Sheo Shankar Lal Srivastava (2006) 3 SCC 276
The Secretary, as an employer under the Sexual Harassment Act, lacks jurisdiction to defend against sexual harassment complaints, which must be heard by a Local Committee.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of complying with the statutory provisions and principles of natural justice in cases of alleged sexual harassment at the workpla....
The main legal point established is that the Presiding Officer of the Internal Complaints Committee must be a higher level woman officer in accordance with Section 4(2)(a) of the Sexual Harassment of....
The definition of 'service matter' excludes disputes not directly related to the conditions of service, allowing the High Court to entertain appeals regarding sexual harassment complaints under the A....
Point of Law : Employment and Service matter - Disciplinary matters - Prohibition of sexual harassment of working women - Jurisdiction - Grievance of petitioner falls within the ambit of “disciplinar....
The judgment emphasizes the importance of adhering to statutory provisions, conducting fair and independent enquiries, and upholding principles of natural justice in cases of sexual harassment at the....
The court emphasized that procedural safeguards and principles of natural justice must be strictly adhered to in disciplinary inquiries against probationers, including the right to be heard and to cr....
The constitution and conduct of the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) and the Central ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the illegality of the suspension order and the lack of statutory force in the committee for summary trial due to non-compliance with the relevant l....
The court emphasized that an employer must await the Internal Complaints Committee's recommendation during an inquiry before transferring an employee involved in a sexual harassment complaint, as per....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.