Back
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Sujoy Paul, J.
Ramesh Pal v. Union of India and others
Writ Petition No.9086 of 2013 (Gwalior); Decided on 14.2.2014.
(2) Constitution of India -- Art.226 -- Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 -- S.14(1)(c) -- Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 -- Ss.11, 13, 18 and 19 -- sexual harassment -- complaint by woman -- enquiry report of internal committee -- show cause notice on such report -- writ petition against such action -- not maintainable -- sexual harassment is treated as misconduct -- remedy is available as per service rules before Administrative Tribunal.
The provisions of 2013 Act are to be read with the provisions of CCA and Conduct Rules. After the judgment of Vishakha (supra) as noticed above, the Central Government amended the Conduct and CCA Rules. Sexual harassment was brought within the ambit of ‘misconduct’ and the methodology to punish the employee was also introduced by way of amendment in rule 14(2) of the CCA Rules, 1965. In addition, 2013 Act was brought into force.
‘Sexual harassment’ is treated as misconduct. Report of internal committee is to be treated by the employer as enquiry report and action needs to be taken as per Service Rules. Thus, as per provisions applicable herein, remedy is not elsewhere. In other words, internal enquiry has to be treated as a service matter. 2013 Act makes it clear that intention of law makers is to treat the action on sexual harassment as service matter. As per this Act, the employee has to avail the remedy under the service Rules.
Section 18 which provides provision of appeal also shows the intention of law makers to bring it within the ambit of service rules for a ‘respondent’ who is an employee and, therefore, it is mentioned that he may prefer an appeal under the Service Rules.
[Para 15
A conjoint reading of sections 11, 13, 18 and 19 of 2013 Act makes it clear that incident of sexual harassment amounts to misconduct and the enquiry on the complaint has to be made as per Service Rules. The definition of ‘service matter’ in the A.T. Act, 1985 includes disciplinary matters.
The internal enquiry against the petitioner falls within the ambit of “service matter”. Thus, the Tribunal will have jurisdiction to decide the said aspect. (1997)3 SCC 261 followed. (2001)10 SCC 623 distinguished. (1997)6 SCC 241 and (2013)1 SCC 297 discussed.
¼1½ efgykvksa dk dk;ZLFky ij ySafxd mRihM+u ¼fuokj.k] izfr”ks/k vkSj izfrrks”k½ vf/kfu;e] 2013 & /kkjk 11] 13] 18 rFkk 19 & iz’kklfud vf/kdj.k vf/kfu;e] 1985 & /kkjk 14¼1½¼x½ & Hkkjr dk lafo/kku & vuqPNsn 226 & ySafxd mRihM+u & efgyk )kjk f’kdk;r & vkarfjd lfefr dh tk¡p fjiksVZ & ,slh fjiksVZ ij dkj.k crkvks lwpuki= & ,slh dkjZokbZ ds fo:) fjV ;kfpdk & pykus ;ksX; ugha & ySafxd mRihM+u vopkj ds :i esa ekuk x;k gS & mipkj lsok fu;eksa ds vuqlkj iz’kklfud vf/kdj.k ds le{k miyH; gSA
¼2½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku & vuqPNsn 226 & iz’kklfud vf/kdj.k vf/kfu;e] 1985 & /kkjk 14¼1½¼x½ & efgykvksa dk dk;ZLFky ij ySafxd mRihM+u ¼fuokj.k] izfr”ks/k vkSj izfrrks”k½ vf/kfu;e] 2013 & /kkjk 11] 13] 18 rFkk 19 & ySafxd mRihM+u & efgyk )kjk f’kdk;r & vkarfjd lfefr dh tk¡p fjiksVZ & ,slh fjiksVZ ij dkj.k crkvks lwpuki= & ,slh dkjZokbZ ds fo:) fjV ;kfpdk & pykus ;ksX; ugha & ySafxd mRihM+u vopkj ds :i esa ekuk x;k gS & mipkj lsok fu;eksa ds vuqlkj iz’kklfud vf/kdj.k ds le{k miyH; gSA
2013 ds vf/kfu;e ds mica/kksa dks oxhZdj.k] fu;a=.k rFkk vihy rFkk vkpj.k fu;eksa ds mica/kksa ds lkFk i<+uk gksxkA fo’kk[kk ¼iwoksZDr½ fu.kZ; ds i’pkr~ tSlk fd Åij ns[kk x;k gS] dsanzh; ljdkj us vkpj.k rFkk oxhZdj.k] fu;a=.k rFkk vihy fu;e la’kksf/kr fd, gSaA ySafxd mRihM+u dks ^vopkj* dh O;kfIr ds Hkhrj yk;k x;k gS rFkk oxhZdj.k] fu;a=.k rFkk vihy fu;e] 1965 ds fu;e 14¼2½ esa la’kks/ku )kjk deZpkjh dks nafMr djus dh iz.kkyh Hkh izofrZr dh xbZA blds vfrfjDr] 2013 dk vf/kfu;e Hkh izo`r fd;k x;k FkkA
ySafxd mRihM+u vopkj ds :i esa ekuk x;k gSA vkarfjd lfefr dh fjiksVZ fu;ksDrk )kjk tk¡p fjiksVZ ds :i esa ekuh xbZ gS rFkk dkjZokbZ vfuok;Z :i ls lsok fu;eksa ds vuqlkj dh tkuk gksrh gSA bl izdkj] bl izdj.k esa ykxw mica/kksa ds vuqlkj] mipkj vU;= ugha gSA nwljs ‘kCnksa esa] vkarfjd tk¡p dks ,d lsok ekeys ds :i esa ekuuk gksrk gSA 2013 ds vf/kfu;e ls ;g Li”V gS fd fof/k fuekZrkvksa dk mn~ns’; ySafxd mRihM+u ij dkjZokbZ dks lsok ekeys ds :i esa ekuuk gSA bl vf/kfu;e ds vuqlkj] deZpkjh dks lsok fu;eksa ds v/khu mipkj miyH; djuk gksrk gSA
/kkjk 18 Hkh tks vihy dk mica/k micaf/kr djrh gS izR;FkhZ tks ,d deZpkjh gS mls lsok fu;eksa dh O;kfIr ds Hkhrj ykus dk fof/k fuekZrkvksa dk mn~ns’; n’kkZrh gS vkSj blfy,] ;g mfYyf[kr fd;k x;k gS fd og lsok fu;eksa ds v/khu vihy izLrqr dj ldrk gSA
vf/kfu;e 2013 dh /kkjk 11] 13] 18 rFkk 19 dks lkFk&lkFk i<+us ij ;g Li”V gksrk gS fd ySafxd mRihM+u dh ?kVuk vopkj dh dksfV esa vkrh gS rFkk tk¡p lsok fu;eksa ds vuqlkj dh tkuk gSA iz’kklfud vf/kdj.k vf/kfu;e] 1985 esa ^^lsok ekeyk** dh ifjHkk”kk esa vuq’kklfud ekeys lfEefyr gSaA
;kph ds fo:) vkarfjd tk¡p ^^lsok ekeyk** dh ifjf/k esa vkrh gSA bl izdkj] mi;qZDr igyw dk fofu’p; djus dh vf/kdkfjrk vf/kdj.k dks gksxhA ¼1997½3 ,l lh lh 261 vuqlfjrA ¼2001½10 ,l lh lh 623 izHksfnrA ¼1997½6 ,l lh lh 241 ¼2013½1 ,l lh lh 297 foosfprA
1. The petitioner, by invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution has challenged the enquiry report of Internal Complaint Committee (Probation and Redressal of Complaints against Sexual Harassment of Women in Workplace). The consequential show cause notice dated 10.12.2013 (Annexure P-7) based on enquiry report Annexure P-1 is also called in question.
2. The admitted facts between the parties are that the petitioner is an employee (substantively holding the post of Professor) in respondent No.2-Organization viz., Laxmibai National Institute of Physical Education, Gwalior. At the relevant point of time, the petitioner was working as Incharge Vice-Chancellor. In this writ petition, the respondents have filed an application for dismissal of the petition for want of jurisdiction of this Court. This application is based on the notification of Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions (Department of Personnel and Training) notification dated 31.10.2008 published in Gazette of India Extraordinary Part 3(ii). By this notification, in exercise of powers conferred by sub-section (2) of section 14 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 (1985 Act), the Government has notified that respondent No.2 will fall within the jurisdiction of Central Administrative Tribunal. The preliminary objection is raised regarding jurisdiction of this Court to grant the relief desired by the petitioner. It is contended by the employer that the grievance of the petitioner amounts to”service matter” and in view of notification under section 14(2) of the Act, the proper forum is the Central Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal being the Court of first instance for the purpose of adjudication of service matters, this Court cannot entertain this petition.
3. With the consent, matter was heard on the question of maintainability of this petition. The apex Court in (1997)6 SCC 241 (Vishaka and others v. State of Rajasthan and others) issued directions with a view to ensure that cases of sexual harassment of women at work place are properly dealt with and guilty are punished. After the said judgment, Central Government inserted proviso to rule 14(2) of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. The said amendment reads as under :
“Provided that where there is a complaint of sexual harassment within the meaning of rule 3-C of the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964, the Complaints Committee established in each Ministry or Department or office for inquiring into such complaints, shall be deemed to be the Inquiring Authority appointed by the Disciplinary Authority for the purpose of these rules and the Complaints Committee shall hold, if separate procedure has not been prescribed for the Complaints Committee for holding the inquiry into the complaints of sexual harassment, the inquiry as far as practicable in accordance with the procedure laid down in these rules”.
4. The amendment was also made by Central Government in CCS (Conduct Rules). This amendment reads as under :
“3-C. Prohibition of sexual harassment of working women. -- (1) No Government servant shall indulge in any act of sexual harassment of any woman at her work place.
(2) Every Government servant who is in-charge of a work place shall take appropriate steps to prevent sexual harassment to any woman at such work place.
Explanation : For the purpose of this rule,”sexual harassment” includes such unwelcome sexually determined behaviour, whether directly or otherwise, as --
(a) physical contact and advances;
(b) demand or request for sexual favours;
(c) sexually coloured remarks;
(d) showing any pornography; or
(e) any other unwelcome physical, verbal or non-verbal conduce of a sexual nature.”
5. The apex Court in subsequent judgments reiterated its view and expressed immediate need to create mechanism to deal with the cases of sexual harassment with a view to ensure that Articles 21, 16, 14, 19, 15(1), 15(3), 42, 51A(a) and 51A(c), become reality.
6. In (2013)1 SCC 297 (Medh
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
