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.

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 Sahitya 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 In