Supreme Courts guideline to enquire sexual harassment complaints.

K. Chandru, J.

1. Aggrieved by the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) dated 09.6.2005 made in O.A. No. 1027 of 2004, the petitioners, who are the Chairman, Commissioner of the Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti [for short, NVS] functioning under the Ministry of HRD at New Delhi as well as the Deputy Director of NVS at Nongriss Hills, Shillong at Meghalaya State, have filed the present writ petition.

2. By the aforesaid order, the CAT set aside the order of termination of the first respondent dated 13.6.2003, confirmed by the order dated 31.8.2004 passed by the appellate authority, and directed reinstatement of the first respondent with all consequential benefits.

3. This Court admitted the writ petition on 11.10.2006 and also granted an interim stay on the same day. When the first respondent filed M.P. No. 2 of 2006 to vacate the stay order, this Court confirmed the stay and dismissed the vacate stay application. It directed the disposal of the main writ petition at an early date.

4. The brief facts leading to the termination are as follows:-

4.1. The first respondent was working as the Principal of the Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, Hailakandi in the State of Assam under the control of the second respondent. A complaint was received that the first respondent had tried to exploit the innocence and modesty of a minor girl student studying in Class X of the said school taking advantage of the absence of her parents from the house. Incidentally, the father of the minor girl was a Driver attached to the school and they were staying in the campus itself.

4.2. The third petitioner conducted a preliminary investigation and concluded that the approach of the first respondent towards the girl student of Class X was not honourable and after a detailed examination of the report of the third petitioner, summary trial was ordered by a Committee into the allegations leveled against the first respondent. A Summary Inquiry was conducted on 27.10.2002 in the presence of the first respondent. The Inquiry Committee, after perusal of the record of the case and deposition of the first respondent made before the Committee, rendered a finding that the first respondent had made advance towards the girl student when she was alone in her residence and concluded that he was prima facie guilty of immoral behaviour. The services of the first respondent were terminated by an order-dated 13.6.2003 passed by the second petitioner, who is the competent authority.

5. The first respondent filed O.A. No. 860 of 2003. Though the place of work of the first respondent was Meghalaya, he gave a Chennai address and challenged the order of termination before the CAT, Chennai Bench. The said O.A. was disposed of by an order dated 01.10.2003 directing the statutory appeal filed by the first respondent to be disposed of within a time frame fixed by the CAT.

The appeal-dated 30.6.2003 filed by the first respondent was dismissed by an order dated 29.10.2003. Not satisfied with the disposal, the first respondent filed a Contempt Application being Cont. P. No. 4 of 2004. The said application was disposed of by an order dated 04.3.2004 holding that the appellate authority had not applied his mind and, therefore, the appellate order was set aside. He was directed to re-hear the appeal after hearing the appellant personally and with a further direction to dispose of the appeal with an independent mind.

6. The Chairman of the NVS, who is also the Minister of Human Resources Development, New Delhi, heard the first respondent personally on 05.8.2004. The first respondent also submitted a written representation on the same day. Thereafter, the Chairman of the NVS dismissed the appeal by an order-dated 31.8.2004 against which, he filed O.A. No. 1027 of 2004 and challenged the original order of termination as well as the appellate order.

7. A detailed reply statement dated 14.2.2005 was filed before the CAT on behalf of the petitioners justifying the action taken