Hon’ble Jayant Banerji, J.—Heard Sri Tarun Agrawal, Sri Saiful Islam Siddiqui, Tahira Kazmi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri V.K. Upadhyaya, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Prakash Padia for the respondents.

2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing of the order dated 14.5.2018, passed by the Disciplinary Authority inflicting penalty of reduction to a lower grade i.e. from the grade ‘D’ to ‘B’ as a measure of disciplinary action against him after finding him guilty of sexual harassment, of leveling malicious or false allegations, and of commission of acts subversive of discipline or of good behaviour. Further, quashing of the order dated 3.7.2018, passed by the Appellate Authority rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner, has also been sought.

3. In the writ petition, it has been alleged that the petitioner was working as Senior Manager (Terminal) in Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and was posted at Allahabad. A complaint was filed against him by a lady employee, whom hereafter, we shall refer to as Ms. X, whereby, she levelled following allegations of harassment against the petitioner :

(i) Ms.X accused the petitioner of asking unwarranted questions of a personal nature while they were proceeding to Amethi on 16.2.2017 for conducting a land evaluation committee survey.

(ii) Ms. X accused the petitioner of inappropriately touching her face and lips, and also holding her hand while they were returning to Allahabad on 17.2.2017 after finishing the land evaluation committee survey.

4. Ms. X alleged that the petitioner made inappropriate physical contact with her during the course of land evaluation committee survey conducted between 16/17.2.2017 and the petitioner also asked unwarranted question of personal nature. Acting on the aforesaid complaint, the concerned authority referred the matter to the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) constituted under the provisions of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (The Act of 2013). The petitioner was placed under suspension with effect from 3.3.2017. The ICC submitted its report on 17.4.2017 recommending disciplinary enquiry against the petitioner. The petitioner was served with a charge-sheet dated 19.4.2017 in which four articles of charge were levelled against him.

5. The Enquiry Officer conducted the enquiry proceeding wherein, the petitioner, complainant-Ms. X and several other witnesses participated. On 8.3.2018, the Enquiry Officer submitted his report to the Disciplinary Authority who accepted the report of the Enquiry Officer and imposed major penalty on the petitioner. The departmental appeal filed by the petitioner came to be rejected by an order dated 3.7.2018 by the Appellate Authority.

6. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the enquiry report itself indicates that the Enquiry Officer found no merit in the allegation of sexual harassment leveled by the complainant. The finding of the Enquiry Officer on Article of charge Nos. 1 and 2 of the charge-sheet reveal that at no point of time did the Enquiry Officer deal with the allegation of inappropriate touching of face and lips of Ms. X. The allegation of inappropriately holding of hand of Ms. X has been negativated by the Enquiry Officer.

7. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has taken us through the enquiry report and the observations made by the Enquiry Officer in the report. It is stated that the allegation of the incident at the Hotel room at Sultanpur was made only during the preliminary enquiry by the ICC, which was found to be not proved by the Enquiry Officer. Learned counsel for the petitioner drew our attention to the internal page No. 44 of the enquiry report to the statement of Ms. X that “If physical contacts were not made, I might not have lodged