JUDGEMENT

JYOTI SINGH, J.

1. By this writ of Certiorari, Petitioner seeks quashing of order dated 03.11.2021 passed by the Disciplinary Authority and the Internal Complaints Committee’s (hereinafter referred to as ‘ICC’) report dated 24.05.2021, alleging contravention of the provisions of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the “2013 Act”). Declaration is sought that conduct of the Charged Officer/Respondent No.3 amounts to sexual harassment at workplace in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Vishaka and Others v. State of Rajasthan and Others, (1997) 6 SCC 241 and provisions of the 2013 Act. This Court is also called upon to impose penalty on Respondent No.3 commensurate with serious allegations against him as well as to award compensation to the Petitioner, amongst the other reliefs.

2. Facts to the extent necessary and as captured in the writ petition are that Petitioner joined National Council for Teacher Education (‘NCTE’) on 06.09.2004 as Stenographer Grade ‘D’ and was sent on deputation in July, 2012. Petitioner re-joined NCTE on 01.01.2015, on expiry of deputation tenure and was promoted as Personal Assistant to Deputy Secretary, Establishment on 14.01.2015. In March, 2015, Petitioner proceeded on leave on account of her daughter’s 10th Class Board examination. After re- joining, she was posted in the Vigilance Section in April, 2015 as Personal Assistant to the then CVO. Respondent No.3 after completing his deputation tenure re-joined NCTE as Under Secretary in and around July, 2015 and was given the charge of Under Secretary (Vigilance). After the Assistant working in the Vigilance Department was transferred to Bhopal, Petitioner was deputed to work as dealing assistant under Respondent No.3, as the then CVO was working from the office at the Ministry.

3. Petitioner asserts in the writ petition that between August, 2015 and December, 2016, Respondent No.3 harassed her number of times, both physically and mentally and did not grant leave, even when required for her child’s examination or health issues. It is alleged that around August, 2015 Respondent No. 3 came to her table and held her hand kept on the mouse, but apologised when Petitioner showed her annoyance. However, nothing changed and few days later he touched her knees on the pretext of operating the computer and again apologised. On two other occasions also Respondent No.3 repeated these acts, once when he cornered her while she was looking for a file in the cupboard and second time when he asked if he could get a kiss. Due to fear and shame, Petitioner did not inform anyone in the office. When her child was suffering from dengue, Respondent No. 3 refused to grant leave initially, though 2 days later earned leave was granted. In December, 2015, Petitioner’s son was injured and she had to rush to the doctor. After she returned home, she saw a message on her phone that no leave would be granted and action will be taken if she did not come to the office. Petitioner faced the same problem when she sought leave for her daughter’s 12th class Board examination. Somewhere in December 2015, a vigilance file pertaining to complaints received against the functioning of Eastern Regional Committee office of NCTE in Bhubaneswar, entrusted to a Committee for investigation, was misplaced. Petitioner was forced to come to office in January, 2016, under a threat that complaint will be made against her to the Member Secretary. Petitioner was forced to put a Note about the missing file and sign the same in the backdate, on the pretext that she was the custodian of the file, whereas the fact was that Respondent No.3 was in-charge of receiving and giving the files. Petitioner made an attempt to reconstruct the missing file and put up a Note dated 03.01.2017, which was seen by Respondent No.3 and marked to SO (Vigilance) and thereafter to the Member Secretary, NCTE. Petitioner confided in t