The complaint did not constitute sexual harassment as defined under the POSH Act, leading to the conclusion that the ICC lacked jurisdiction to proceed.

JUDGMENT :

The petitioner is working as the Manager of Kerala State Financial Corporation (KSFE), Vikas Bhavan Branch, Thiruvananthapuram. The petitioner has approached this court impugning the proceedings initiated by the Internal Complaint Committee (ICC) on a complaint filed by the 3rd respondent. The petitioner has challenged the notice issued in Ext.P5 by the presiding officer of the ICC, KSFE, regional office, Thiruvananthapuram (URBAN) dated 03.07.2024 in the present writ petition.

2. The petitioner issued a memo dated 31.05.2024 to eight Junior female staff in his office for the non-achievement of a chitty canvassing target. The memo was issued asking the eight employees to furnish their explanations for the failure to comply with the work order within seven days of receipt of the memo. The eight members of the staff who were issued with the memo did not submit any proper explanation to the memo, and the petitioner reported the matter to the higher authorities of the 1st respondent on 19.06.2024.

3. On the very next day i.e., on 20.06.2024, the 3rd respondent, who is not even working in the branch headed by the petitioner along with several members of the political union from various branches of the 1st respondent without any prior appointment and permission of the petitioner forcibly entered the cabin of the petitioner at 2:45 PM and misbehaved with him. They attempted to snatch the mobile phone of the petitioner. The petitioner lodged a complaint about this incident to the Police in Ext.P2 on 21.06.2024. It is alleged in the complaint that the 3rd respondent along with other employees forcibly made entry to the cabin of the petitioner and when the petitioner asked them to vacate the cabin except for three members among them, the 3rd respondent directed all other employees to remain standing inside the cabin of the petitioner and tried to snatch his mobile phone as well. He said that they created a hostile atmosphere inside the office of the petitioner and threatened him to inflict physical harm if any action were taken against any of the employees.

4. The statement of the petitioner was recorded by the Police on 27.06.2024.

5. The 3rd respondent thereafter made a complaint to the ICC which would read as under:-

From

Sujitha C S

Special Grade Assistant,

SDT RR (Thiruvanathapuram)

To

Smt. Preetha Divakar

Presiding officer,

Internal Complaint Committee,

Thiruvananthapuram Urban Region

Madam,

With regard to the issuance of memo to eight female employees of the Vikas Bhavan branch for the reason that they had not done the chit canvassing, I as an office bearer of the Party, along with other office bearers visited Vikas Bhavan Branch on 20.6.2024. But when I entered the cabin of Manager Harish M.S, he tried to record my video with his mobile camera and shouted to me get out of the cabin in obscene language. He behaved in such a way without considering me as a woman and by insulting me in front of others. Request to take strict action against this manager.

Faithfully,

S/d

Sujitha C S

SGA

6. On this complaint, a notice has been issued to the petitioner in Ext.P3 on 08.07.2024. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the notice issued in Ext.P3 to the petitioner is wholly without jurisdiction. The 3rd respondent was not an employee in the branch of the petitioner. She forcibly entered the cabin of the petitioner, and she was the person who misbehaved with the petitioner, tried to snatch the mobile phone and disrupted the official work being performed by the petitioner. There is no allegation of sexual harassment in the complaint, and therefore, the cognizance taken on the said complaint by the 2nd respondent is without jurisdiction.

7. On the other hand, Ms Pooja Menon, the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent, submits that the petitioner's apprehension that the enquiry will proceed is premature. The proceedings before the ICC are only at a preliminary stage, and the committee has not decided whether the complaint requir