2012 (10) TMI 1269 - SC - Indian Laws

Widespread non-compliance with Vishaka guidelines prompts mandatory amendments to service rules and swift creation of robust complaints committees

Medha Kotwal Lele and Ors. Versus Union of India (UOI) and Ors.

SC held that widespread non-compliance with Vishaka guidelines required immediate remedial directions: states/UTs must amend Civil Services Conduct Rules ... - Issues Involved:1. Compliance with Vishaka Guidelines.2. Amendments in Civil Services Conduct Rules and Standing Orders.3. Formation and Functioning of Complaints Committees.4. Implementation of Vishaka Guidelines by Various States and Union Territories.5. Directions for Future Compliance and Legislative Enactment.Summary:Compliance with Vishaka Guidelines:The judgment highlights that despite the guidelines laid down in Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997) 6 SCC 241 for the prevention and redressal of sexual harassment at workplaces, many women still struggle to have their most basic rights protected. The statutory law is not yet in place, and the Protection of Women Against Sexual Harassment at Workplace Bill, 2010 is still pending in Parliament.Amendments in Civil Services Conduct Rules and Standing Orders:The Supreme Court noted that several states have not made necessary amendments in their Civil Services Conduct Rules and Standing Orders as directed in Vishaka. For instance, states like Goa, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, and Orissa have not made these amendments. The court emphasized that the amendments should ensure that the report of the Complaints Committee is treated as an inquiry report under the CCS Rules.Formation and Functioning of Complaints Committees:The judgment observed that several states have not constituted Complaints Committees as per the Vishaka guidelines. For example, Rajasthan, Meghalaya, Himachal Pradesh, Assam, and Jammu and Kashmir have not formed such committees. Some states have constituted only one Complaints Committee for the entire state, which is inadequate.Implementation of Vishaka Guidelines by Various States and Union Territories:The court reviewed affidavits from various states and union territories, noting significant non-compliance. For instance, the Union Territories of Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Daman and Diu, Lakshadweep, Dadra and Nagar Haveli, and Puducherry have not made amendments in the Standing Orders. The Union Territory of Chandigarh has not carried out amendments in the Civil Services Conduct Rules.Directions for Future Compliance and Legislative Enactment:The Supreme Court issued several directions to ensure compliance with Vishaka guidelines until legislative enactment is in place:1. Amendments in Rules: States and Union Territories must amend their Civil Services Conduct Rules and Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Rules within two months to treat the Complaints Committee's report as an inquiry report.2. Formation of Complaints Committees: Adequate number of Complaints Committees must be formed at taluka, district, and state levels, headed by women, with an independent member associated.3. Mechanisms in Public and Private Sectors: Public and private sector organizations must ensure full implementation of Vishaka guidelines, including transferring the alleged harasser if found guilty and preventing harassment of witnesses and complainants.4. Professional Bodies Compliance: Statutory bodies like the Bar Council of India, Medical Council of India, and others must ensure compliance with Vishaka guidelines by their registered members and organizations.The court concluded that non-compliance with Vishaka guidelines should be addressed by approaching the respective High Courts, which are better positioned to handle such grievances. The writ petitions and appeals were disposed of with no orders as to costs.