Read Time: 08 minutes

Synopsis

The Delhi High Court recently opined that the Prevention of Sexual Harassment at the Workplace Act holds institutions accountable for delaying action on sensitive sexual harassment claims. Management and authorities must act responsibly, court added.

A bench of Justice Prathiba M Singh said, "Adjudication of complaints relating to sexual harassment needs to be dealt with utmost care. The inquiry needs to be done by a duly constituted ICC and the same needs to be complete in all aspects. Institutions cannot escape liability for dragging on these sensitive complaints".

The order has been passed in a plea filed by a woman alleging that she had filed a complaint to the Head of HR- IFCI Factors Ltd, complaining about sexual harassment by a senior.

The complaint was placed before the Managing Director-IFL who in turn forwarded the complaint with his remarks to IFCI-HR & CVO, IFCI Group to take up the matter in their Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) as the accused person was an employee of IFCI.

Later, the General Manager of IFCI Ltd. marked the complaint back to IFCI. Thereafter, the ICC of IFCI was formed and proceedings were initiated under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 against the accused. The ICC of IFL was reconstituted again and then again reconstituted.

ICC in its report directed the accused to give a written apology. ICC was of the view that some reparation was required for the complainant, owing to the conduct of the accused.

Vide another letter, the ICC was informed by the Chief General Manager of IFCI that the recommendations of the ICC were accepted by the Disciplinary Authority of IFCI, and necessary orders were also issued.

The accused, however, filed an appeal to the Appellate Authority of IFCI Ltd., i.e., the Board of Directors and in the said appeal, a re-examination was directed, by the ICC of IFCI.

This letter was challenged by the complainant in the present petition on the ground that since the re-examination had been directed by the ICC of IFCI Ltd, she no longer wished to participate in the said enquiry as the complaint dates back to 2019 and she cannot be subjected to a second round of proceedings before the ICC, as the same is extremely frustrating and torturous.

Whereas, the accused contended that the recommendations of the ICC report had directed him to give a written apology, which had been issued and his statutory remedy of appeal under Section 18 of POSH could not be taken away.

In view of the above, the bench noted that "In POSH-related complaints and matters, the constitution of the ICC is of utmost importance and the same has to be in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The management and authorities of the organisations have to behave in a responsible manner and on the mere ground that the constitution was incorrect, a re-examination of the whole proceedings cannot be directed under the present facts and circumstances".

"Considerable time which has elapsed cannot be wasted both in respect of the complainant/Petitioner as also in respect of the person against whom the complaint is made...The complainant cannot be harassed and put to inconvenience to appear again and again before the ICC, even of a connected organisation and be expected to produce witnesses to support her case, all over again. Even the said witnesses may not be available now in the organisation," the bench opined.

Keeping in mind the fact that the alleged error was by IFCI due to which the re-examination had been directed, the high court directed that the women shall be paid Rs.1,00,000 as costs by IFCI.

Case Title: P Vs. Union of India & Ors.

Statute: The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, the Prevention of Sexual Harassment at the Workplace Act.