A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

1. A question regarding the compliance of principles of natural justice has arisen in this writ petition in the context of an enquiry conducted by the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) constituted under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Work Place (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act 14 of 2013’).

2. In view of the legal question that is involved in this writ petition, this Court is only addressing the legal issue bereft of facts involved.

3. The petitioner is working as an Officer–Apron in the Ground Services Department (GSD) of Air India Limited, Thiruvananthapuram. The ICC of Air India Limited, Southern Region received a complaint forwarded by the Airport Director. This complaint alleged to have been raised by 17 lady employees’ of Air India-SATS (AI-SATS), a joint venture company of Air India and Singapore Air Transport Services Limited. The Committee conducted an enquiry against the petitioner based on the complaint. The report of the Committee is produced as Ext.P23. The issue in this writ petition is revolved around the validity of the enquiry report, on the ground of non compliance of principles of natural justice.

4. The case of the petitioner is that he was not given any opportunity in the matter and complaint as referred in the ICC is a forged one by some officials of the joint venture company and some of the officers of the Air India to wreck vengeance against the petitioner for having filed a complaint before the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). Therefore, the enquiry concluded without giving an opportunity to the petitioner to cross examine the complainant and to controvert the factual finding in the enquiry report, is vitiated.

5. The stand of the Airport Authority is that the report is a preliminary report to find the involvement of the petitioner in sexual harassment as raised in the complaint. It is contended that when a prima facie case is made out based on the report, further disciplinary action would be initiated as per the Rules and Regulations of the Air India and therefore, the petitioner can defend any action proposed in such proceedings. It is further contended that on account of the secrecy and privacy required in conducting such an enquiry and to give full freedom to the complainant to depose before the Committee, an enquiry was conducted respecting dignity of the complainant and also in a fair manner. The respondents also relied on the Government of India Office Memorandum dated 16.07.2015 to justify the procedure followed in the matter. To sum up the defence of the respondents is that the report now prepared is only a preliminary enquiry report to signal the management to proceed further as against the petitioner for the misconduct based on the sexual harassment.

6. As seen from the pleadings and reports, the stand taken up the Air India as well as ICC before this Court is that an enquiry regarding misconduct on sexual harassment has not attained finality and it can be proved or disproved in the disciplinary proceedings if any initiated by the management based on the report.

7. Act 14 of 2013 was enacted to provide protection against the sexual harassment of women at work place and also for redressal of the complaint of sexual harassment. The preamble of the Act 14 of 2013 is as follows:-

“An act to provide protection against sexual harassment of women at workplace and for the prevention and redressal of complaints of sexual harassment and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.”

8. Therefore, the provisions in the Act has to be understood in the light of preamble as above. Section 4 Chapter 2 refers to the constitution of the Internal Committee, the composition of the members is by nomination by the employer. The Presiding Officer of the Committee shall be women employed as senior level at the work place. Section 9 of Chapter 4 provides for procedure of raising complaint by aggrieved women. Any aggrieved