P.C. :

1) The Petition challenges judgment and order dated 1 July 2024 passed by Member Industrial Court, Pune dismissing Appeal (IESO) No. 1 of 2023 filed under provisions of Section 18 Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Rules, 2013 (POSH Act). Petitioner had challenged the report dated 30 September 2022 passed by the Internal Complaints Committee of Respondent No.2-Employer.

2) I have heard Ms. Sana Khan, the learned counsel appearing for Petitioner. Despite service of notice, none has appeared on behalf of Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

3) In its report dated 30 September 2022, the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) has reproduced three broad allegations against the Petitioner as under:

Incident 1

She mentioned that Vinod Kachave has passed a comment on her hair looking at the length and volume that, “you must be using JCB to manage your hair”. Also, he started singing a song related to her hair.

Incident 2

Tanya Sharma further narrated an incident where, Vinod Kachave had passed a sexual remark on a male employee’s private part. Pravin Kedar, in a common forum where other female employees were present. He checked with the male employee about his girlfriend. When the emplooyee answered that he does not have any girlfriend, Vinod Kachave said ‘Kyun tera machine kharab hai”.

Incident 3

Tanya Sharma, also raised the complaint against her Reporting Manager, Madhavi Pawar. She stated that Madhavi use to check her out and use to casually discuss her attire with other male colleagues.

4) After reproducing the three incidents narrated by the complainant, the ICC has recorded following findings after conduct of enquiry:

1. It was observed by the ICC that Vinod Kachave, though agreed to some of the charges, was not willing to accept the others, inspite of informing him that ICC has multiple witnesses who have confirmed all the allegations.

2. All serious allegations were confirmed by multiple wintnesses that were interview by the committee. The same was recorded by the committee.

3. ICC also felt that during the course of the meeting Vinod Kachave was reluctant in agreeing to the fact that his behavior is completely unprofessional and he has created work environment which is not conducive to female employees and amounts to harassment at workplace. He was in complete state of denial on the most of the serious charges.

4. Vinod Kachave also tried to interfere with the investigation and acknowledged that he had met Madhavi Pawar and pravin Kedar on 21 morning before ICC could commence the meeting. In fact, he was again in a state of denial and said that as per him it was completely acceptable that he has met both the employees.

5) I proceed on a footing that all the three incidents can be held to be proved on the basis of evidence led before the ICC.

6) So far as the first incident is concerned, the same relates to passing of comment by the Petitioner with regard to length and volume of the complainant’s hair and he singing a song relating to her hair. Considering the nature of comment allegedly made by the Petitioner towards the complainant it becomes difficult to believe that the same was made with an intent of causing any sexual harassment to the complainant. She herself never perceived the comment as sexual harassment when the comment was made. The comment was made on 11 June 2022. However the WhatsApp conversation between the Petitioner and the complainant post 11 June 2022 would indicate that the Petitioner was in fact motivating the complainant with regard to performance of her work and the complainant had expressed gratitude towards the efforts of the Petitioner. Therefore even if the allegations qua Incident No.1 is accepted as proved, it becomes difficult to hold that the Petitioner has committed any act of sexual harassment.

7) So far as the second incident is concerned, the same relates to making of remarks by the Petitioner in r