Back
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P. G. Ajithkumar, J
ABRAHAM MATHAI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner challenges reports under posh act. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments regarding legality of inquiry process. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. requirement of written complaint for inquiry under posh act. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. clarification of sexual harassment definitions and requirements. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 5. importance of natural justice in inquiry procedures. (Para 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 6. judicial discretion on entertaining writ petitions despite alternative remedies. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29) |
| 7. quashing of illegal reports and directives under posh act. (Para 30) |
JUDGMENT
This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was filed by the petitioner aggrieved by Ext.P5 report of the 2nd respondent and Ext.P6 proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent.
2. The petitioner is the Managing Director of the company named “Amstor Information Technology (India) Pvt.Ltd” operating from Technopark, Thiruvananthapuram. His wife was a Director. The 4th respondent was employed as an accountant-cum-manager in the company. She was appointed by the wife of the petitioner on 02.06.1997. Owing to the dereliction of duties, the 4th respondent was ter
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
