SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 28677

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA, J
Mr Dondaptti Sateesh Reddy – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
WP/19730/2023



HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No. 19730 OF 2023

O R D E R :

Petitioner is running the software company in the name and style of ‘VIP Screen LLP Wave Broadcasting Solutions’, which provides graphic designs to customers. It is stated, on 16.12.2021, he hired the 3rd respondent as a graphic designer with a monthly salary of Rs. 22,000/-. She performed satisfactorily for six months, but later when faced difficulties in work and unable to download t he graphics sent by one of the customers at Chennai, petitioner advised her to focus on work, warning that failure to do so could result in termination as per the agreement terms.

According to petitioner, to gain efficiency, in October, 2022, he asked the 3rd respondent to go to Chennai for training, but she refused due to health reasons. In the first week of November 2022, Chennai customer again requested training for respondent No. 3. Considering her language barrier, the petitioner planned to go to Chennai for other work and asked the 2nd respondent No. 2 to accompany. The 3rd respondent booked air tickets for both herself and petitioner for 15th of November up journey and 17th return journey and also booked two rooms at Park Hotel, Chennai.

It is stated, petitioner and the 3rd respondent arrived at Hotel on 15.11.2022 around 5:00 PM and checked- into their rooms. Around 5:10 PM, petitioner called the 3rd respondent to go out for evening snacks, but she declined, citing the need to rest. Petitioner left alone and returned around 7:00 PM, attempting to contact respondent No. 3 several times with no response. After complaining to hotel management, they found the 3rd respondent's room empty, without any luggage. Petitioner therefore, filed a complaint with Station House Officer, Annasela Police Station. Surprisingly, the 3rd respondent sent an e mail to the HR Manager and petitioner on 17.11.2022 at 2:29 PM, stating she couldn't attend work for the next two weeks due to personal reasons. On 01.12.2022, she requested leave until Monday, 05.12.2022, and has not attended work since 17.11.2022.

While so, petitioner received a phone call from Jubilee Hills Police Station on 13.12.2022 at about 11:00 AM, informing them of a complaint filed by the 3rd respondent alleging misbehaviour with her at Chennai, which led to registration of FIR No. 741 of 2022 on 13.12.2022 under Sections 354, 354-A, and 509 IPC. Police issued notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. to petitioner. Additionally, the 2nd respondent sent a mail to petitioner on 16.02.2023, summoning them to attend LC committee meeting on 22.2.2023 at 12:00 Noon at the office of the District Welfare Officer, Abdis. The case was numbered as 2 of 2022. Petitioner appeared through counsel on 22.2.2023 and submitted an explanation, asserting their innocence and addressing the false complaint. Subsequently, another notice was sent via mail dated 03.03.2023, directing petitioner to attend meetings on 06.03.2023 and 10.03.2023. the 2nd respondent instructed petitioner to settle the dispute with the 3rd respondent by paying an amount of Rs. 20 lakhs. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 6598 of 2023 and the complainant also filed Writ Petition No. 6031 of 2023 for non- concluding the enquiry as per the Act. This Court disposed of both the Writ Petitions on 10.03.2023 with a common order, the operative portion of the order is as below;-

" In view of the submissions made by respective parties, both the writ petitions are disposed of directing respondent No.2- Local Committee to issue notice to the petitioner as well as respondent No.3 in W.P.No.6598 of 2023 for conducting enquiry as required under Section 10 of POSH Act, 2013 by giving date of enquiry on 25.03.2023. The petitioner and respondent No.3 in W.P.No.6598 of 2023 are entitled to raise all the objections as available under law. Respondent No.2 is directed to consider the objections raised by respective parties and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top