The main legal point established in the judgment is that the procedure for conducting an inquiry into a complaint of sexual harassment must be fair, impartial, and aligned with the principles of natural justice.

JUDGMENT (Oral)

REVIEW PET. 185/2023

1. The respondent has filed an application under Section 114 of Code of Civil Procedure for review of judgment dated 17.05.2023. The petitioner had filed the writ petition with the following prayers:

"a.) Quash order dated 21.10.2022 which constituted the Internal Complaints Committee;

b). Quash order dated 03.11.2022 rejecting the representation of petitioner and suspension order dated 16.11.2022

c.) Direct respondent to conduct the inquiry as per relevant provisions of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act & Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules

2. The petition was disposed of by this court vide judgment dated 17.05.2023. The operative paragraphs of the Order reads as under:-

"3. After hearing learned counsel for parties, it is agreed by learned counsel for petitioner on instructions that the present petition may be disposed of, if order dated 02.02.2023, report of Inquiry Officer dated 21.10.2022 and charge-sheet dated 02.02.2023 are set aside and ICC may start fresh inquiry/proceedings against the petitioner, as per the law by giving him an opportunity to participate in the said proceedings.

5. Accordingly, we hereby dispose of present petition by setting aside the order dated 02.02.2023, report of Inquiry Officer dated 21.10.2022 dated 02.02.2023 and giving liberty that ICC shall start inquiry as per law by giving him to in the said proceedings.

6. Needless to say, be entitled to all his rights as provided Central Civil Services (Classification, Control 1965."

3. It is submitted in the Review Petition that the court had raised a question that if the complaint is being investigated by a specifically constituted Internal Complaints Committee (hereinafter referred to as "ICC"), then why was the Charge Sheet served upon the petitioner by the Disciplinary Authority.

4. It is submitted that Rule 14 of (CCS CCA Rule, 1965) provides that the Complaints Committee established in each Ministry, Department and Office, for enquiring into the complaints of sexual harassment shall be deemed to be the Enquiring Authority for the purposes of these Rules and the Complaints Committee shall hold the enquiry so far as practicable, in accordance with the procedure laid down in the Rules. Therefore, even before the enactment of POSH Act, 2013 provisions were already available for conducting enquiry by the Complaint Committee in the Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965.

5. Section 11 of the POSH Act, 2013 itself provides that the enquiry has to be conducted in accordance with Service Rules. Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules contemplates a two-tier enquiry viz., the First-Stage Fact-Finding Enquiry to ascertain the truth of the allegations made which is followed by a Second Stage Enquiry by Department in which Charge Sheet is filed and a Departmental Enquiry is conducted.

6. The petitioner has claimed that after the enactment of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 and framing of Rules thereunder, the Department of Personnel and Training, Government of India vide OM dated 16.07.2015 has incorporated this procedure of conducting a two stage enquiry. i.e. the first stage and the second stage.

7. The petitioner has submitted that in the present case as well, on receipt of the sexual harassment complaint dated 18.10.2022, DG CRPF referred it to ICC in accordance with Section 4 of the POSH Act, 2013. A Fact-Finding Enquiry (which is 1st stage enquiry envisaged under CCS (CCA) Rules) had been conducted in which a prima facie case was made out. Thereafter, the Department, after the approval of the Disciplinary Authority had served Memorandum of Charges dated 02.02.2023 which is the Second-Stage Enquiry in accordance with Section 11 of the POSH Act read with Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965.

8. It is argued that the sole object of the Fact-Finding Committee is to ascertain the truth befo