TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (4) TMI 1664
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....st the writ petitioner for sexually harassing the fourth respondent. A committee comprising of three Senior Professors enquired the writ petitioner and recommended the University Authority to take suitable action against the writ petitioner based on the University Act and Statute. The writ petitioner was placed under suspension on 22.10.2018 in contemplation of the departmental enquiry into the grave charges of sexual harassment. 3(ii). As per Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, an Internal Complaints Committee was constituted to conduct an enquiry on the alleged misconduct of the writ petitioner. The said Committee recorded a statement from the victim on 16.11.2018. The writ petitioner was directed to appear before the Committee on 17.11.2018. The said Committee recorded the statement of the writ petitioner on 17.11.2018. Based upon the statements recorded on 16.11.2018 and 17.11.2018, the Internal Complaints Committee submitted its report to the University holding that the act of delinquent professor amounts to sexual harassment and misconduct and the committee recommended for imposition of appropriate punishment under appli....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d that the enquiry initiated against the writ petitioner is without jurisdiction and the findings of the Internal Complaints Committee and the impugned order of compulsory retirement is invalid and illegal and is liable to be set aside. The respondent University was directed to reinstate the petitioner with all attendant benefits including the arrears of salary. The said order of the learned Single Judge is under challenge in the present Writ Appeal. 6. Contention of the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Appellant: 6(i). The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant/University contended that the issue of limitation of three months would arise only in a case where the complaint has been lodged by the victim and not in a case where suo-motu proceedings are initiated by the University authorities on the basis of the complaint from a third party. 6(ii). The learned Senior Counsel has relied upon 2021 SCC Online SC 1173 and contended that the proceedings under Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act 14 of 2013 cannot be invalidated on hyper technical interpretation of applicable Service Rules. He further contended that the S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....les of natural justice is necessary only where the misconduct is denied or when any term or condition of employment if proposed to be altered to the employee's disadvantage without his consent. However, in the present case, the misconduct has been admitted by the delinquent and hence, all the contentions with regard to the violation of the principles of natural justice cannot be said to vitiate either the enquiry or the punishment imposed upon the delinquent by the University authorities. The learned Senior counsel further contended that the delinquent being a guide of the victim, victim has been sexually exploited by the delinquent. Considering the nature of relationship between the guide and the research scholar, the conduct and behaviour of the delinquent is highly immoral. 6(vii). The learned Senior Counsel further contended that the hyper technical approach of relying upon each and every provision of the Central Act 14 of 2013 only result in nullifying any action as against the delinquent which would encourage sexual harassment at work place. He further contended that the enquiry as against the delinquent has been conducted as per Central Act 14 of 2013 and as per the sta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... But in the present case, no charge memo was served upon the delinquent at any point of time either before constitution of Internal Complaints Committee or after constitution of Internal Complaints Committee. 7(vi). He further contended that after completion of enquiry by ICC, the report shall be made available to the delinquent employee as contemplated under Section 13 of Act 14 of 2013. However, in the present case, neither enquiry report was furnished to the delinquent nor any explanation was called for from the delinquent by disciplinary authority. The learned Senior Counsel further contended that a copy of the complaint alleged to have been given by the victim ought to have been furnished to the delinquent and opportunity should have been granted to the delinquent to file his reply within a period of 10 days as contemplated under Rule 7 of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Rules, 2013. But in the present case, a copy of the complaint alleged to have been given to the petitioner was not at all furnished to him while he was directed to appear before the ICC on 13.11.2018. 7(vii). The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the first r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent. According to him, the incidents are said to have taken place in January 2018 and the alleged complaint has been lodged in October 2018. Hence, the complaint is clearly barred by limitation as contemplated under Section 9 of the Act. 7(xi). The learned Senior Counsel further contended that the learned Single Judge has considered each one of the provisions of the Act 14 of 2013 and has arrived at a finding that the very initiation of the proceedings as against the petitioner are without jurisdiction and the enquiry has not been conducted in a manner as provided under Act 14 of 2013 or as per the statute applicable to the University. He further contended that the learned Single Judge has also arrived at a finding that at all stages of enquiry, the principles of natural justice have been violated and only based upon the said findings, the learned Single Judge has set aside the punishment imposed by the University authorities and restored the delinquent to his original status. Hence, he prayed for dismissal of the Writ Appeal. 7 (xii). The learned Senior Counsel has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in (2013) 1 SCC 297 to impress upon the Court th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nquent on 21.12.2018. 12. Admittedly, a copy of the said complaint has not been furnished to the delinquent as contemplated under Rule 7 of Sexual Harassment of Women At Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Rules, 2013 and affording an opportunity to the delinquent to submit his reply. 13. The enquiry of the Internal Complaints Committee should be that of an enquiry conducted by the department as contemplated under Service Rule applicable to the delinquent. Section 11 of the Central Act 14 of 2013 clearly point out that an enquiry should be in accordance with the provisions of the Service Rules applicable to the delinquent. Admittedly, in the present case, as per statute of Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, Tirunelveli, the delinquent should be furnished with a charge memo and there should be an enquiry/ personal hearing. On completion of the enquiry, explanation should be called for from the delinquent before imposition of punishment. However, in the present case, the enquiry has not been conducted as contemplated under Section 11 of the Central Act 14 of 2013. 14.As per Service Rules applicable to delinquent, the enquiry report should be furnished to him and expl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....m aggrieved women ( girl students of the University) about the sexual harassment at workplace (in this case, University campus), it was obligatory on the Administration to refer such complaints to the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, within the stipulated time period as predicated in Section 9 of the sexual harassment of women at workplace (prevention,prohibition,and Redressal) Act,2013(for short "the 2013 Act''). Upon receipt of such complaint, an inquiry is required to be undertaken by the Internal Committee or the Local Committee in conformity with the stipulations in section 11 of the 2013 Act. The procedure for conducting such inquiry has also been amplified in the 2015 Regulations. Thus understood, it necessarily follows that the inquiry is a formal inquiry required to be undertaken in terms of the 2015 Regulations. The allegations to be inquired into by such committee being of '' sexual harassment'' defined in section 2(n) read with section 3 of the 2013 Act and being a serious matter bordering on criminality, it would certainly not be advisable to confer the benefit on such employee by merely passing a simple order of termination. Such comp....