JUDGMENT

C. Hari Shankar, J. (Oral)

[Ideally, as this case involved an allegation of sexual harassment at the workplace, the identities of the persons involved ought to have been masked, unless they consented to their disclosure. However, the learned Industrial Tribunal has not done so, and this is a petition under Article 227 emanating from the order of the learned Industrial Tribunal, in which the identities of the complainant and her alleged oppressor already stand disclosed.]

1. The issue in controversy, before me, is whether Section 5¹ of the Limitation Act, 1963, would apply to appeals under Section 18² of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 ("the SHW Act").

2. Respondent 1 accused Respondent 2 of having harassed her, sexually, at the workplace. The complaint was referred to an internal complaints committee of the petitioner which, vide inquiry report dated 24th May 2016, exonerated Respondent 2. Respondent 1 appealed thereagainst, under Section 18 of the SHW Act"), to the learned Central Government Industrial Tribunal ("the learned IT"). The impugned order, dated 3rd March 2022, passed by the learned Industrial Tr