“Personal Feud, Misunderstandings at Workplace, not Sexual Harassment”: Madras High Court Ruled Setting Aside TN Women’s Commission Compensation Order

Read Time: 08 minutes

Setting aside Tamil Nadu Women’s Commission order directing Loyola College to pay Rs. 64.30 lakh to a terminated female employee, the Madras High Court on Wednesday ruled that not getting along with male colleague giving rise to personal feud cannot be classified as sexual harassment.

The Bench of Justice N. Sathish Kumar reiterating Supreme Court definition in Visaka's case (Visaka vs. State of Rajasthan [1997 (6) SCC 241]) said,

Without showing any instances leading to sexual harassment merely on the basis of some misunderstandings in the work place between superior and (her)………, every such instance cannot be termed as sexual harassment.”

According to the Apex Court's definition of sexual harassment in Visaka’s Case, only unwelcome sexual behavior by way of physical contact and advances, a demand or request for sexual favors, making sexually colored remarks, showing pornography or any other unwelcome physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct of sexual nature would amount to sexual harassment.

Dismissal of the Writ petition

Against her termination of 2014, the woman namely Mary Rajasekaran filed a writ petition in 2016 before the High Court seeking directions to Loyola College to permit the petitioner to rejoin and continue her duties.

Perusing the entire records and allegation of the matter, the court noted that entire allegations made in the petitioner’s first complaint of 2013  made it clear that it was about organizing an Alumni function for the college and personal allegations of swindling of money by the respondent (Accused). In the entire letter there was no allegation concerning the sexual harassment whatsoever, Court said.

Court reckoned that only on the first time in 2014, that too after a certain complaint has been investigated by the police against writ petitioner’s son, she made allegations that the accused harassed her mentally, emotionally and sexually.

Court further added that there were no details as to the alleged harassment i.e., sexual harassment or physical abuse in her 2014 complaint email written to the Police Commissioner.

Therefore, finding that in this case the main allegation of the sexual harassment appeared to be after thought and raised at a later point of time, Court found no merit in the writ petition and dismissed the same.

Women commission’s order

The woman complained about the matter before the Tamil Nadu State Commission for Women in 2016 pertaining to her 2016 writ petition, to which the commission took cognizance and issued a notice to Rector, Jesuit Residence, Loyola College in 2020. The Commission mainly dealt with question of Ms. Rajasekaran’s salary arrears, return of her original certificates and letter of her service termination. However, after the chairperson’s lone visit to Loyola College, the commission found that Rajasekaran was subjected to intense suffering and directed the college to pay her a total sum of Rs.64,30,000/- with interest.

To this, the High Court noted that it was at loss to understand how the commission had passed such order without proper enquiry and evidence in this regard. The court said that Chairperson came to that conclusion only based on representation made by Ms. Rajshekaran.

Stressing that the primary function of the Commission is to find out the prima facie case after a thorough investigation, Court held,

“Therefore, the Order of the Women Commission is necessarily to be set aside. Despite the Regulations under the Central Act for entertaining the complaint when same is already ceased by the Court of law. The Commission ought not have entertained the complaint independently and passed such order. The manner in which the findings have been recorded is also not based on proper evidence.”

Hence, the court set aside the commission’s order and allowed the writ petition filed by the Rector & Vice-President of Loyola College against the said order.

(Case Title: Mary Rajasekaran vs. University of Madras & Ors. and The Rector & Vice-President, Loyola College Society vs. The Tamil Nadu State Commission for Women & Ors. )