The internal complaints committee must adhere to principles of natural justice, including providing findings to parties, to ensure fair inquiry under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act.

ORDER :

1. The petitioners are working as Headmistresses in the primary schools and they have made certain allegations against the 6^th respondent / Block Educational Officer that he has sexually harassed them. Apart from these petitioners, another Headmistress of Nagakonaanoor namely Radharani has also lodged a similar complaint against the 6^th respondent. All these complaints were referred to the Internal Complaints Committee constituted under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 [herein after shall be referred as 'the Act']. The internal complaints committee [herein after shall be referred to as 'the committee'] has submitted its report dated 25.05.2022 that the complainants have not substantiated their complaints with documents and that the complainants have participated in the family function conducted by the 6^th respondent. Challenging the said report this writ petition is filed.

2. The learned Counsel for the petitioners by referring to the report of the committee submits that the procedure as contemplated under Section 11 of the Act and the procedures as contemplated under Rule 7 of the the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Rules, 2013 [herein after shall be referred as 'the Rules'] have not been followed by the committee while enquiring into the complaint and the same has not been reflected in the impugned report.

3. The learned Counsel by referring to the second proviso to Section 11 of the Act submits that if the committee comes to the conclusion that the complaint has not been proved, copy of the findings should be provided to the parties enabling to them to make representations as against the findings before the committee. This according to the learned Counsel for the petitioners is to ensure the principle of natural justice and the same has not been complied in this case. The committee is also expected to conduct enquiry by following the principle of natural justice as prescribed under Rule 7 of the Rules.

4. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the official respondent and the learned Counsel for the 6^th respondent submits that the committee has been constituted as contemplated under the Act and there is no violation in constituting the committee. The committee has provided reasonable opportunity. If the petitioners are aggrieved by the report of the committee under Section 13 (2) of the Act, they are having appeal remedy before the Director of Elementary Education, DPI Compound, Nungambakkam, Chennai, who has been notified as the Appellate Authority, as per Rule 11 of the Rules. He further submits that the committee has come to the conclusion that these petitioners have participated in the family function of the 6^th respondent subsequent to their complaints.

5. This Court has considered the rival submissions made and perused the materials placed on record.

6. The petitioners are Headmistresses in the primary schools. They have lodged complaints as against the 6^th respondent / Block Development Officer that he has sexually harassed them. Apart from these petitioners, one Headmistress Radharani has also lodged a similar complaint as against the 6^th respondent. All these complaints have been referred to the internal complaints committee and the committee has enquired and came to the conclusion that the complainants have not established their case as against the 6^th respondent. This report should be treated as a report under Section 13 (2) of the Act. The committee has reported that the complainants have not established their case by producing documents, mess