2019 Supreme(MP) 517

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Rohit Arya, J.
Global Health Pvt. Ltd. – Petitioner
Versus
Local Complaints Committee, District Indore and Others – Respondents
W. P. Nos. 22317 and 22314 of 2017
Decided On : 16-09-2019

The court held that the complainant was subjected to sexual harassment within the meaning of section 2(n) read with section 3(2)(ii), (iii), (iv) and (v) of the Act, 2013. The court also held that the hospital was liable to pay compensation to the complainant for the pain and suffering, loss of reputation, emotional distress and loss of salary of eighteen months for no fault on her part resulting into deprivation of right to live with dignity. The court further held that the hospital was liable to pay penalty of Rs. 50,000/- for non-existence of internal complaints committee at the relevant point of time.

Headnote:

SEXUAL HARASSMENT OF WOMEN AT WORKPLACE (PREVENTION, PROHIBITION AND REDRESSAL) ACT, 2013 - SECTION 2(N) - MEDICAL SUPERINTENDENT OF HOSPITAL - SEXUAL HARASSMENT - ENQUIRY REPORT - VALIDITY - PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE - VIOLATION - INTERNAL COMPLAINTS COMMITTEE - EXISTENCE - TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT - VALIDITY - COMPENSATION - REINSTATEMENT - CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS - QUASHING.

Fact of the Case:

The complainant, a senior manager at a hospital, filed a complaint alleging sexual harassment by the medical superintendent. The local complaints committee conducted an enquiry and submitted a report finding the complainant to have been subjected to sexual harassment. The hospital challenged the report and the order passed by the respondent No. 1 based on the report.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the complainant was subjected to sexual harassment within the meaning of section 2(n) read with section 3(2)(ii), (iii), (iv) and (v) of the Act, 2013. The court also held that the hospital was liable to pay compensation to the complainant for the pain and suffering, loss of reputation, emotional distress and loss of salary of eighteen months for no fault on her part resulting into deprivation of right to live with dignity. The court further held that the hospital was liable to pay penalty of Rs. 50,000/- for non-existence of internal complaints committee at the relevant point of time.

Issues: 1. Whether the enquiry report was valid and sustainable in law? 2. Whether the principles of natural justice were violated during the enquiry? 3. Whether the internal complaints committee was in existence at the hospital? 4. Whether the termination of employment of the complainant was valid? 5. Whether the complainant was entitled to compensation and reinstatement? 6. Whether the criminal proceedings against the petitioners in W. P. No. 22314/2017 were maintainable?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the enquiry report was valid and sustainable in law as the hospital and the medical superintendent were given sufficient opportunity to participate in the enquiry and cross-examine the complainant. 2. The court held that the principles of natural justice were not violated during the enquiry as the hospital and the medical superintendent were given sufficient opportunity to participate in the enquiry and cross-examine the complainant. 3. The court held that the internal complaints committee was not in existence at the hospital at the relevant point of time. 4. The court held that the termination of employment of the complainant was not valid as it was a stigmatic termination and not discharge simplicitor. 5. The court held that the complainant was entitled to compensation for the pain and suffering, loss of reputation, emotional distress and loss of salary of eighteen months for no fault on her part resulting into deprivation of right to live with dignity. The court also held that the complainant was entitled to EPF and other monetary dues (if still not paid) and character and experience certificate during the period she was in employment without attaching any stigma. 6. The court held that the criminal proceedings against the petitioners in W. P. No. 22314/2017 were not maintainable as they were not noticed by the Local Committee and no opportunity was afforded to participate in the enquiry.

Final Decision: The court disposed of both the writ petitions with the following directions: (i) the respondent No. 3/ complainant is held entitled for compensation to the tune of Rs. 25,00,000/- (Rupees twenty five lakhs only) for the pain and suffering, loss of reputation, emotional distress and loss of salary of eighteen months for no fault on her part resulting into deprivation of right to live with dignity; (ii) she is entitled for EPF and other monetary dues (if still not paid); (iii) the respondent No. 3/complainant be issued character and experience certificate during the period she was in employment without attaching any stigma by the competent authority of Hospital; (iv) the respondent No. 3/complainant is directed to furnish the details of savings bank account to the Hospital within two weeks from today for necessary compliance (if not already with the Hospital); (v) the Hospital is directed to deposit the amount in the savings bank account of respondent No. 3/complainant within eight weeks positively; failing which the same shall attract interest at the rate of 09% (nine) per annum from today. (vi) the Hospital is directed to pay penalty of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) (if not already paid) in terms of section 26 of the Act, 2013 due to non-existence of internal complaints committee at the relevant point of time; within a period of four weeks from today failing which the proceedings in accordance with law be initiated by the respondent No. 1 against the Hospital; (vii) the proposed action under sections 499 and 500 Penal Code against the petitioners in W. P. No. 22314/2017 is quashed.