LEGAL NOTE ON SEXUAL HARASSMENT COMPLAINT UNDER

THE POSH ACT, 2013

Client: Ms. Ananya Sharma

Prepared for: Internal Research Task
Date: 3rd June 2025

Client Queries:

1. What are my rights under the Prevention of Sexual Harassment Act, 2013,
regarding this situation?

The Act recognizes the following rights:

• Right to a Safe Working Environment: Employers are mandated to ensure a

workplace free from sexual harassment [Section 19].
• Right to Redressal: Any aggrieved woman has the right to file a complaint with the
Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) [Section 9].
• Right to Interim Relief: The ICC can recommend interim measures such as transfer of
either party or granting leave to the complainant [Section 12].
• Right to Confidentiality: Proceedings under the Act are to be kept confidential
[Section 16].
• A fair inquiry process
• Compensation for damages

The Madras High Court, in Amutha v. The Director of Medical and Rural Health Service
(MANU/TN/5600/2022), emphasised that there should be strict compliance with each and
every procedural requirement posited by the POSH Act.

Further The Delhi High Court in Ruchika Singh Chhabra v. M/S. Air France India And Anr.
highlighted the necessity of adhering to a fair inquiry process as per POSH guidelines. Here
the procedural conduct of ICC was biased and contrary to the principles of natural justice and
the court directed Air France to reconstitute the committee in strict compliance with the
POSH Act within thirty days and to conduct the inquiry afresh.

2. What steps should I take if the ICC fails to act on my complaints, and what legal
recourse do I have against my employer for their inaction?

• The employer must constitute an ICC [Section 4], provide training, and assist in
redressal [Section 19].
• The ICC must conduct a fair, timely, and impartial inquiry [Section 11].
If the ICC fails to act or conducts a biased inquiry:

• Ms. Sharma can lodge a complaint with the Local Complaints Committee (LCC)
under Section 6.
• She may also:
o File a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for violation of her
fundamental rights (e.g., right to life and dignity under Article 21).

The Delhi High Court, in Sarita Verma v. New Delhi Municipal Corporation
& Ors, (2016 LLR 785 (2)). held that merely because the petitioner has an
alternate remedy to file the given case before another forum, it would not act
as a constitutional bar for the Court to adjudicate upon the matter.

o File a complaint with the State Women’s Commission or National Commission

for Women.
o File a complaint through SHe-Box- an online complaint platform by The
Indian Ministry of Women and Child Development, where based on an
assessment of the complaint, the WCD will direct such complaint to the
employer’s Internal Complaints Committee (“ICC”) or the Local Complaints
Committee set up by the government at each district (“LCC”), as the case may
be. The WCD also proposes to actively monitor the progress of inquiry
conducted by the ICC / LCC and keep the complainant updated
o If management fails to take action on the complaint, the Parties may reach out
to the IC or choose to appeal through the legal process. An appeal should be
filed within 90 day. The appellate authority under the Prevention of Sexual
Harassment (POSH) Act, 2013, is typically a court or tribunal, depending on
the state’s jurisdiction and any applicable service rules.

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir, in D.B Singh v. State of Jammu &
Kashmir and Ors. MANU/JK/76/2019, held that the POSH Act does not bar
the complainant from seeking remedy under the Ranbir Penal Code
(equivalent to the Indian Penal Code (IPC)) just because the matter has already
been taken cognizance of by the IC constituted under the provisions of the
POSH Act.

3. Are there specific timelines for the ICC to investigate complaints, and what happens
if they do not adhere to these timelines?

• Complaint Filing: Within 3 months of the incident (extendable by ICC for valid
reasons) [Section 9(1)].
• Inquiry Timeline: Inquiry must be completed within 90 days [Section 11(4)].
• Action by Employer: Must act on the ICC's recommendation within 60 days of
receiving the report [Section 13(4)].
Failure to adhere to these can render the employer liable for penalty under Section 26.

4. What evidence do I need to gather to support my case, and how should I document
the harassment incidents?

Ms. Sharma can collect and maintain the following:

• Dated written records of each incident.

• Screenshots or printouts of any inappropriate messages or emails.
• Witness statements, if any.
• Copies of previous complaints to the ICC.
• Any communication from the ICC or employer in response

However, POSH Act makes it clear that presence of an evidence is not necessary to file a
complaint. So, if an employee approaches the IC with a complaint, communicate to the
complainant that the availability of evidence is not necessary to file a complaint and that the
IC will do everything to ensure that justice is delivered.

The Delhi High Court, in the case of Gaurav Jain v. Hindustan Latex Family Planning
Promotion Trust and Ors. (2015 SCC OnLine Del 11026), pointed out that strict rules of
evidence are not required to be followed in inquiry proceedings and that the IC can adopt its
own procedure in conformity with the principles of natural justice and especially in a case of
sexual harassment

This is because the standard of proof used in sexual harassment inquiries by the Internal
Committee is “preponderance of probabilities” and not “proof beyond reasonable doubt”

6. Relevant Case Laws

1. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997) 6 SCC 241

The case arose when Bhanwari Devi, a social worker in Rajasthan, was gang-raped
for attempting to prevent a child marriage. At that time, there was no specific law
addressing sexual harassment at the workplace. The Court, invoking Article 32 of the
 Constitution, issued binding guidelines known as the Vishaka Guidelines, which
defined sexual harassment and mandated preventive and remedial steps by employers.

Key points:

1. Sexual harassment violates Articles 14, 15, 19(1)(g), and 21.

2. Guidelines required every employer to provide mechanisms for redress,
including a complaints committee with a woman presiding officer and
external members.

Ms. Sharma’s situation directly involves failure of an ICC to act. The Vishaka
judgment emphasizes employer accountability and mandates effective grievance
redressal mechanisms. If the ICC is inactive or biased, it breaches the very principles
laid down in Vishaka, supporting her claim of fundamental rights violation under
Article 21.

2. Medha Kotwal Lele v. Union of India (2013) 1 SCC 297

This case dealt with the implementation gaps in the Vishaka Guidelines. Petitioners
raised concerns that many institutions had not constituted complaints committees or
failed to take complaints seriously. The Supreme Court reiterated that non-compliance
with Vishaka Guidelines was unacceptable and directed state and central governments
to ensure proper implementation.

Key points:

1. The Court emphasized monitoring and enforcement of guidelines.

2. Lack of an effective redressal system amounts to dereliction of duty by
the employer.
3. State must step in if employers fail.

Since Ms. Sharma’s employer failed to take action despite her complaint, this
judgment supports the argument that inaction amounts to non-compliance with
mandatory duties. It reinforces her right to approach external forums like the Local
Complaints Committee or seek constitutional remedies.

Further relevant cases are mentioned along with the responses to the queries above.
 MANU/SC/0786/1997
Equivalent/Neutral Citation: AIR1997SC 3011, 1997(2)ALD(C ri)604, 1997(2)ALT(C ri)579, 1997((2))ALT(C ri)579, 1997(5)ALT14(SC ),
1998(1)BLJR228, III(1997)C C R126(SC ), [1997]27C LA321(SC ), 1997(3)C rimes188(SC ), [1997(77)FLR297], 1997 INSC 604, JT1997(7)SC 384,
2013(3)KarLJ546, 1997LabIC 2890, 1998(2)LLN965(SC ), 1997-2-LW(C rl)604, 1997(4)RC R(C riminal)187, RLW1997(3)SC 373, 1997(5)SC ALE453,
(1997)6SC C 241, [1997]Supp3SC R404

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Writ Petition (Criminal) Nos. 666-70 of 1992
Decided On: 13.08.1997
Vishaka and Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
J.S. Verma, C.J.I., S.V. Manohar and B.N. Kirpal, JJ.
Counsels:
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: Fali Sam Nariman, Meenakshi Arora and Niti Dixit, Advs
For Respondents/Defendant: T.R. Andhyarujina, Solicitor General, Mukul Mudgal, Suvira
Lal, C.V. Subba Rao, K.S. Bhati and M.K. Singh, Advs.
Case Note:
Constitution - gender justice - Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and
Section 2 of Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 - petition for preservation
and enforcement of right to gender equality and fundamental rights of
working women - Court framed various guidelines including disciplinary
action, complaint mechanism and complaints committee - Court directed that
guidelines and norms would be strictly observed in all work places for
preservation and enforcement of right to gender equality of working women.
ORDER
J.S. Verma, C.J.I.
1 . This writ petition has been filed for the enforcement of the fundamental rights of
working women under Articles 14 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India in view of the
prevailing climate in which the violation of these rights is not uncommon. With the
increasing awareness and emphasis on gender justice, there is increase in the effort to
guard against such violations; and the resentment towards incidents of sexual
harassment is also increasing. The present petition has been brought as a class action
by certain social activists and NGOs with the aim of focusing attention towards this
societal aberration, and assisting in finding suitable methods for realisation of the true
concept of 'gender equality'; and to prevent sexual harassment of working women in all
work places through judicial process, to fill the vacuum in existing legislation.
2. The immediate cause for the filing of this writ petition is an incident of alleged brutal
gang rape of a social worker in a village of Rajasthan. That incident is the subject-
matter of a separate criminal action and no further mention of it, by us, is necessary.
The incident reveals the hazards to which a working woman may be exposed and the
depravity to which sexual harassment can degenerate; and the urgency for safeguards
by an alternative mechanism in the absence of legislative measures. In the absence of
legislative measures, the need is to find an effective alternative mechanism to fulfil this
06-12-2024 (Page 1 of 9) www.manupatra.com Legal Observer Trust
felt and urgent social need.
3. Each such incident results in violation of" the fundamental rights of 'Gender Equality'
and the 'Right to Life and Liberty'. It is a clear violation of the rights under Articles 14
15 and 21 of the Constitution. One of the logical consequences of such an incident is
also the violation of the victim's fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g) 'to practice
any profession or to carry out any occupation, trade or business'. Such violations,
therefore, attract the remedy under Article 32 for the enforcement of these fundamental
rights of women. This class action under Article 32 of the Constitution is for this reason.
A writ of mandamus in such a situation, if it is to be effective, needs to be accompanied
by directions for prevention; as the violation of fundamental rights of this kind is a
recurring phenomenon. The fundamental right to carry on any occupation, trade or
profession depends on the availability of a "safe" working environment. Right to life
means life with dignity. The primary responsibility for ensuring such safety and dignity
through suitable legislation, and the creation of a mechanism for its enforcement, is of
the legislature and the executive. When, however, instances of sexual harassment
resulting in violation of fundamental rights of women workers under Articles 14 19 and
21 are brought before us for redress under Article 32, an effective redressal requires
that some guidelines should be laid down for the protection of these rights to fill the
legislative vacuum.
4. The notice of the petition was given to the State of Rajasthan and the Union of India.
The learned Solicitor General appeared for the Union of India and rendered valuable
assistance in the true spirit of a Law Officer to help us find a proper solution to this
social problem of considerable magnitude. In addition to Ms. Meenakshi Arora and Ms.
Naina Kapur who assisted the Court with full commitment. Shri Fali S. Nariman
appeared as Amicus Curiae and rendered great assistance. We place on record our great
appreciation for every counsel who appeared in the case and rendered the needed
assistance to the Court which has enabled us to deal with this unusual matter in the
manner considered appropriate for a cause of this nature.
5 . Apart from Article 32 of the Constitution of India, we may refer to some other
provisions which envisage judicial intervention for eradication of this social evil. Some
provisions in the Constitution in addition to Articles 14 19(1)(g) and 21, which have
relevance are:
Article 15:
15. Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste,
sex or place of birth.-
(1) The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on only
of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.
(2) xxx xxx xxx
(3) Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making
any special provision for women and children.
(4) xxx xxx xxx Article 42:
4 2 . Provision for just and humane conditions of work and
maternity relief - The State shall make provision for securing
just and humane conditions of work and for maternity relief.

06-12-2024 (Page 2 of 9) www.manupatra.com Legal Observer Trust

 Article 51A:
51 A. Fundamental duties.- It shall be the duty of every citizen of
India;-
(a) to abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and
institutions....
xxx xxx xxx
(c) to promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood
amongst all the people of India transcending religious,
linguistic and regional or sectional diversities; to renounce
practices derogatory to the dignity of women;
xxx xxx xxx
6. Before we refer to the international conventions and norms having relevance in this
field and the manner in which they assume significance in application and judicial
interpretation, we may advert to some other provisions in the Constitution which permit
such use. These provisions are:
Article 51:
5 1 . Promotion of international peace and security.- The State shall
endeavour to-
xxx xxx xxx
(c) foster respect for international law and treaty obligations in
the dealings of organised people with one another; and
xxx xxx xxx
Article 253:
253. Legislation for giving effect to international agreements.-
Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing provisions of this Chapter,
Parliament has power to make any law for the whole or any part of the
territory of India for implementing any treaty, agreement or convention
with any other country or countries or any decision made at any
international conference, association or other body.
Seventh Schedule:
List I - Union List:
xxx xxx xxx
1 4 . Entering into treaties and agreements with foreign countries and
implementing of treaties, agreements and conventions with foreign countries.
xxx xxx xxx
7. In the absence of domestic law occupying the field, to formulate effective measures
to check the evil of sexual harassment of working women at all work places, the
06-12-2024 (Page 3 of 9) www.manupatra.com Legal Observer Trust
contents of International Conventions and norms are significant for the purpose of
interpretation of the guarantee of gender equality, right to work with human dignity in
Articles 14 15 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution and the safeguards against sexual
harassment implicit therein. Any International Convention not inconsistent with the
fundamental rights and in harmony with its spirit must be read into these provisions to
enlarge the meaning and content thereof, to promote the object of the constitutional
guarantee. This is implicit from Article 51(c) and the enabling power of the Parliament
to enact laws for implementing the International Conventions and norms by virtue of
Article 253 read with Entry 14 of the Union List in Seventh Schedule of the Constitution.
Article 73 also is relevant. It provides that the executive power of the Union shall
extend to the matters with respect to which Parliament has power to make laws. The
executive power of the Union is, therefore, available till the Parliament enacts
legislation to expressly provide measures needed to curb the evil.
8 . Thus, the power of this Court under Article 32 for enforcement of the fundamental
rights and the executive power of the Union have to meet the challenge to protect the
working women from sexual harassment and to make their fundamental rights
meaningful. Governance of the society by the rule of law mandates this requirement as
a logical concomitant of the constitutional scheme. The exercise performed by the Court
in this matter is with this common perception shared with the learned Solicitor General
and other members of the Bar who rendered valuable assistance in the performance of
this difficult task in public interest.
9 . The progress made at each hearing culminated in the formulation of guidelines to
which the Union of India gave its consent through the learned Solicitor General,
indicating that these should be the guidelines and norms declared by this Court to
govern the behavior of the employers and all others at the work places to curb this
social evil.
10. Gender equality includes protection from sexual harassment and right to work with
dignity, which is a universally recognised basic human right. The common minimum
requirement of this right has received global acceptance. The International Conventions
and norms are, therefore, of great significance in the formulation of the guidelines to
achieve this purpose.
11. The obligation of this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution for the enforcement
of these fundamental rights in the absence of legislation must be viewed along with the
role of judiciary envisaged in the Beijing Statement of Principles of the Independence of
the Judiciary in the LAWASIA region. These principles were accepted by the Chief
Justices of the Asia and the Pacific at Beijing in 1995 as those representing the
minimum standards necessary to be observed in order to maintain the independence
and effective functioning of the judiciary. The objectives of the judiciary mentioned in
the Beijing Statement are:
Objectives of the Judiciary:
10. The objectives and functions of the judiciary include the following:
(a) to ensure that all persons are able to live securely under
the Rule of Law;
(b) to promote, within the proper limits of the judicial function,
the observance and the attainment of human rights; and

06-12-2024 (Page 4 of 9) www.manupatra.com Legal Observer Trust

 (c) to administer the law impartially among persons and
between persons and the State.
1 2 . Some provisions in the 'Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women', of significance in the present context are:
Article 11:
1 . States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate
discrimination against women in the field of employment in order to
ensure, on a basis of equality of men and women, the same rights, in
particular:
(a) The right to work as an inalienable right of all human
beings;
xxx xxx xxx
(f) The right to protection of health and to safety in working
conditions, including the safeguarding of the function of
reproduction
xxx xxx xxx
Article 24:
States Parties undertake to adopt all necessary measures at the national
level aimed at achieving the full realization of the rights recognised in
the present Convention.
13. The general recommendations of CEDAW in this context in respect of Article 11 are:
Violence and equality in employment:
22. Equality in employment can be seriously impaired when women are
subjected to gender specific violence, such as sexual harassment in the
work place.
23. Sexual harassment includes such unwelcome sexually determined
behavior as physical contacts and advances, sexually coloured remarks,
showing pornography and sexual demands, whether by words or
actions. Such conduct can be humiliating and may constitute a health
and safety problem; it is discriminatory when the woman has
reasonable grounds to believe that her objection would disadvantage
her in connection with her employment, including recruiting or
promotion, or when it creates a hostile working environment. Effective
complaints procedures and remedies, including compensation, should
be provided.
2 4 . States should include in their reports information about sexual
harassment, and on measures to protect women from sexual
harassment and other forms of violence of coercion in the work place.
The Government of India has ratified the above resolution on June 25, 1993 with some
reservations which are not material in the present context. At the Fourth World
06-12-2024 (Page 5 of 9) www.manupatra.com Legal Observer Trust
Conference on Women in Beijing, the Government of India has also made an official
commitment, inter alia, to formulate and operationalize a national policy on women
which will continuously guide and inform action at every level and in every sector; to
set up a Commission for Women's to act as a public defender of women's human rights;
to institutionalise a national level mechanism to monitor the implementation of the
Platform for Action. We have, therefore, no hesitation in placing reliance on the above
for the purpose of construing the nature and ambit of constitutional guarantee of gender
equality in our Constitution.
14. The meaning and content of the fundamental rights guaranteed in the Constitution
of India are of sufficient amplitude to encompass all the facets of gender equality
including prevention of sexual harassment or abuse. Independence of judiciary forms a
part of our constitutional scheme.
The international conventions and norms are to be read into them in the absence of
enacted domestic law occupying the field when there is no inconsistency between them.
It is now an accepted rule of judicial construction that regard must be had to
international conventions and norms for construing domestic law when there is no
inconsistency between them
and there is a void in the domestic law. The High Court of Australia in Minister for
Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v. Tech 128 ALR 353, has recognised the concept of
legitimate expectation of its observance in the absence of a contrary legislative
provision, even in the absence of a Bill of Rights in the Constitution of Australia.
15. In Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa MANU/SC/0307/1993 : 1993CriL J2899 , a
provision in the ICCPR was referred to support the view taken that 'an enforceable right
to compensation is not alien to the concept of enforcement of a guaranteed right', as a
public law remedy under Article 32, distinct from the private law remedy in torts. There
is no reason why these international conventions and norms cannot, therefore, be used
for construing the fundamental rights expressly guaranteed in the Constitution of India
which embody the basic concept of gender equality in all spheres of human activity.
16. In view of the above, and the absence of enacted law to provide for the effective
enforcement of the basic human right of gender equality and guarantee against sexual
harassment and abuse, more particularly against sexual harassment at work places, we
lay down the guidelines and norms specified hereinafter for due observance at all work
places or other institutions, until a legislation is enacted for the purpose. This is done in
exercise of the power available under Article 32 of the Constitution for enforcement of
the fundamental rights and it is further emphasised that this would be treated as the law
declared by this Court under Article 141 of the Constitution.
The guidelines and norms pre-scribed herein are as under:
Having regard to the definition of 'human rights' in Section 2(d) of the
Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.
Taking note of the fact that the present civil and penal laws in India do not
adequately provide for specific protection of women from sexual harassment in
work places and that enactment of such legislation will take considerable time.
It is necessary and expedient for employers in work places as well as other responsible
persons or institutions to observe certain guidelines to ensure the prevention of sexual
harassment of women:

06-12-2024 (Page 6 of 9) www.manupatra.com Legal Observer Trust

 1. Duty of the Employer or other responsible persons in work places and other
institutions:
It shall be the duty of the employer or other responsible persons in
work places or other institutions to prevent or deter the commission of
acts of sexual harassment and to provide the procedures for the
resolution, settlement or prosecution of acts of sexual harassment by
taking all steps required.
2. Definition:
For this purpose, sexual harassment includes such unwelcome sexually
determined behavior (whether directly or by implication) as:
a) physical contact and advances;
b) a demand or request for sexual favours;
c) sexually coloured remarks;
d) showing pornography;
e) any other unwelcome physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct
of sexual nature.
Where any of these acts is committed in circumstances whereunder the
victim of such conduct has a reasonable apprehension that in relation
to the victim's employment or work whether she is drawing salary, or
honorarium or voluntary, whether in Government, public or private
enterprise such conduct can be humiliating and may constitute a health
and safety problem. It is discriminatory for instance when the woman
has reasonable grounds to believe that her objection would
disadvantage her in connection with her employment or work including
recruiting or promotion or when it creates a hostile work environment.
Adverse consequences might be visited if the victim does not consent
to the conduct in question or raises any objection thereto.
3. Preventive Steps:
All employers or persons in charge of work place whether in the public
or private sector should take appropriate steps to prevent sexual
harassment. Without prejudice to the generality of this obligation they
should take the following steps:
(a) Express prohibition of sexual harassment as defined above
at the work place should be notified, published and circulated
in appropriate ways.
(b) The Rules/Regulations of Government and Public Sector
bodies relating to conduct and discipline should include
rules/regulations prohibiting sexual harassment and provide for
appropriate penalties in such rules against the offender.
(c) As regards private employers steps should be taken to
include the aforesaid prohibitions in the standing orders under
06-12-2024 (Page 7 of 9) www.manupatra.com Legal Observer Trust
 the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946.
(d) Appropriate work conditions should be provided in respect
of work, leisure, health and hygiene to further ensure that
there is no hostile environment towards women at work places
and no employee woman should have reasonable grounds to
believe that she is disadvantaged in connection with her
employment.
4. Criminal Proceedings:
Where such conduct amounts to a specific offence under the Indian
Penal Code or under any other law, the employer shall initiate
appropriate action in accordance with law by making a complaint with
the appropriate authority.
In particular, it should ensure that victims, or witnesses are not
victimized or discriminated against while dealing with complaints of
sexual harassment. The victims of sexual harassment should have the
option to seek transfer of the perpetrator or their own transfer.
5. Disciplinary Action:
Where such conduct amounts to misconduct in employment as defined
by the relevant service rules, appropriate disciplinary action should be
initiated by the employer in accordance with those rules.
6. Complaint Mechanism:
Whether or not such conduct constitutes an offence under law or a
breach of the service rules, an appropriate complaint mechanism
should be created in the employer's organization for redress of the
complaint made by the victim. Such complaint mechanism should
ensure time bound treatment of complaints.
7. Complaints Committee:
The complaint mechanism, referred to in (6) above, should be adequate
to provide, where necessary, a Complaints Committee, a special
counselor or other support service, including the maintenance of
confidentiality.
The Complaints Committee should be headed by a woman and not less
than half of its member should be women. Further, to prevent the
possibility of any undue pressure or influence from senior levels, such
Complaints Committee should involve a third party, either NGO or other
body who is familiar with the issue of sexual harassment.
The Complaints Committee must make an annual report to the
Government department concerned of the complaints and action taken
by them.
The employers and person in charge will also report on the compliance
with the aforesaid guidelines including on the reports of the Complaints
Committee to the Government department.
06-12-2024 (Page 8 of 9) www.manupatra.com Legal Observer Trust
 8. Workers' Initiative:
Employees should be allowed to raise issues of sexual harassment at
workers' meeting and in other appropriate forum and it should be
affirmatively discussed in Employer-Employee Meetings.
9. Awareness:
Awareness of the rights of female employees in this regard should be
created in particular by prominently notifying the guidelines (and
appropriate legislation when enacted on the subject) in a suitable
manner.
10. Third Party Harassment:
Where sexual harassment occurs as a result of an act or omission by
any third party or outsider, the employer and person in charge will take
all steps necessary and reasonable to assist the affected person in
terms of support and preventive action.
11. The Central/State Governments are requested to consider adopting suitable
measures including legislation to ensure that the guidelines laid down by this
order are also observed by the employers in Private Sector.
12. These guidelines will not prejudice any rights available under the Protection
of Human Rights Act, 1993.
Accordingly, we direct that the above guidelines and norms would be strictly
observed in all work places for the preservation and enforcement of the right to
gender equality of the working women. These directions would be binding and
enforceable in law until suitable legislation is enacted to occupy the field. These
Writ Petitions are disposed of, accordingly.
© Manupatra Information Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

06-12-2024 (Page 9 of 9) www.manupatra.com Legal Observer Trust


 


      


    

  
 !"  
##$$%"

&#%"  ! "#$" ##%$" 
 $&'#(")* +

 
 $#+
        

       
    !   
) ,+
'(&)*+(
(&',&(+&*
(&'-(&+!
''*!( !*
(

-)#$".(
/ .  /0 % #% %    $ .$$1 1 %. 00  %00 %    2
34%.0#%  5    64%.00 7#21 %. /0 %
#% % %.0#%7$4%.6$8
 $! 0! #%% 0$ 9
%. #% % 0 07 ! #%%  0 704 :$%. +%0   0% .0 % ;  2%4 %
0 704:$%.+%05208
0 .   %. #% % 0  %.% .  /08 1   20 % ! #%%  0 704
:$%. +%0 0 482$7 $28 .   %0 % 07 %. 40 <  . 6$8
9$#7% ! 0 *,.01 . =2$$4 .0 .0  .00 . $1 
7#$ %%%. 0%0#%   3.07#$ %>2 04
/$0032%%.>2 040#0%.%3 $0 *%.7% 7%.
#% % 0 / #2% % 5208  0 704 :$%.+%0 34 00 %  < 
  >2% $ 00  0$ 9 1 .0 07 ! #%%  0 704 :$%. +%0 /
$ # 34 00 % <   . 7 / .$$1 34 %. #% % 0
30%.  +20%  
    %.  +20%/. $%0%  1%.
/0 % #% %  . $ 10%  00  %0 7 %4     


  <    '23>2%$4 %.   /0 % #% %  / $ 34 00 %
  3%.237  7 %.0 %.%%.0$ 21.%0 
%. /0 % #% %  . 37 02%22  .0%0 %.  0#% 1 %
/.7 %. #% % 0 7  7#$ % / ## %  6$8
 $ ! 0
! #%%  / %. % 07     / %. 7$   %%   91 
.0 0$ 0 7#$ % . 1  %000 %. #% % 0 % 5208  0 704 :$%.
+%0 /. .    87 /4 07 %. #0% /08 1 #$  110 9 90 %.
7. $%.#0%/0 %#% % 
1.$02$##0 10%.#% % 0237 %%.%%. 7#21%00
00 . 3 # % %. %  %.  0#% 1 % /.7 %.
#% % 0 . #000  =2$ .07% 7#$ %  %. 40   %.%

19-11-2022 (Page 1 of 6) www.manupatra.com POSH AT WORK

7#$ % % $$# 1%.00%.  7#2100.3#/ %.7$
  %%  % .0 %. #% % 0 0 .9 1 $1 %. 7#$ % 1 % %.
 0#%  . 7#21 00 / $ # / %.  %.0 4 07 %.
%/. .%.0#%%8.01 6$8
 $ ! 0 %  
%004%%.%%834%.#0%7%30%. +20%  
 
  %     .00 0 1 % %. $0 2$ 0 %.
#% % 0 %. 7#21 00 . 3 # / %. 7$   %%   $
1 % %. 00  %.  +20% #  
        .00 % 
$ 3$%3% 
2
0 ' '.; 6 $0'# $?907% $0237 %%.%%.#% % 0 
%.$4%20%! #%%  0 704:$%.+%0#0% 2$0%  
  . $% %. .# %$ 34   # 7  / %.2% % 7% 1 %. 
0#% 7$4 %. 6$8
 $ ! 0 /.  .0 77 % 2#0 0 
%.00  77 / 2  %.  010     #0% 07 %.  . .
77 %% 90$ 0012$0 %   . . % 7 %  %. 00 #0#0$4 
%.00 %.0 77 / $ 2 % %. #% % 0      . 
0#% . $ 07 %. 2%  %. #% % 0 % %. #2%4  0%0 
:$%. '09  .       %0 %8 1 1 @  %.% 2 %.
#2%4  0%0 :$%. '09  .  #  #2%%  00   < 
#2% 1%.#% % 007 ! #%% % 5208  6%.00%. #2%4
 0%0  :$%. '09  %.  0#% 2 %. >2% $ 00 
0$ 9 1 %. #% % 0  <   %.% / .$$1  %. 0$ 0 /0 %
#% %   
       30 %.  +20%  ! 8/ 1 %. 7 %.
 0#% . 7  7#$ % 1 % %. #% % 0 30 %. #2%4
 0%0  :$%. '09  .  ! %.904 =% 4 %. #% % 0 #000 
7#$ % 1 % %.  0#%      .0 7#$ % / $
0/0 % %. ) .8 +77 %%      . (>2 04 +77 %% %0
2% 12$$,$1>2 047%$2 %.%%.% 0$$1% 7
34 %. #% % 0  $  3$  0/0 % 0#0% % %.  0%0% 
23$ :$%.  
30 1%%.$0'# $?907% $0#0%07%.$$1% %.
#% % 0  $  1 %.0 %.0 77 %.% .   % 7 %  %. 00
#0#0$4 .   $% 70  . . $ 3.9 904 .0.  $ 2
32 9$1211 %%.#% % .0#%#202 1%. $
%. #% % 0 0$ 9 %. #% % 0 #202% % %. #2%%  00 # 34 %.
#2%4  0%0  :$%. '09  .   %0 %  0 1 % %. $0 '# $
?907% $0%. 7#2100 >2% $00%.0$ 000
#2%% 34%.#2%4 0%0:$%.'09 .  %0 %%. /0 %#% % 
  $/ %.2% .$$1 1 %. 00  %. #2%4  0%0  :$%. '09  
%.00 % %7 % 3$
4. +20% 0%.0 9$237  7$#02%.7%0 $
00
5 . #% % 0  /08 1   % 20 % 0 704 :$%. +%0 ! #%%  '.
$1  7#$ % 1 % 
 8 6$8
 $ ! 0 *,.01
! #%%      %.% %.    0 . 7 =2$ 32 903$$4 9 % 1
.0 0 =2$ 0$% . #  6  %. 7#$ % %. 6$8
 $ ! 0
5720/## %34%. #2%4  0%0 :$%. '09  .    5
  <   %    % >2 0 % %. $$1%  7 34 %.
#% % 0  ! <  %. #% % 0 / 0$ 9 07 2%4 #202% % %.

19-11-2022 (Page 2 of 6) www.manupatra.com POSH AT WORK

#2%% 00#34%. #2%4  0%0 :$%. '09  .    5  
  %  <   110 9 90 %. 7 %. #% % 0 ##0.
%.  +20%  
        %.  +20% . $ 10%  00 
%0 7%4  <  .0%0%./0 %#% % /%82#0 $ #$
  %.%4%.$02$##0 10%.#% % 0%.
$0 ?907% 9% 0#0% 30 %.  +20% %.% %. /0 % #% %  .
37 02%22.%. 1209 90;2 %  %./0 %#% % 
0 1$4 %.  +20% 00 1 %. 237   7   %.0   $ %. /0 %
#% %  .0%0%. 7#2100.3#34%.0#%
   3  %. 0$ 0 00  #2%%  %  <  # 34 %.
#2%4 0%0:$%.'09 .
6. 7#2100.3#3%.0$ 000#2%% #
34 %. #2%4  0%0  :$%. '09    <    5    < 
/. . / %. 23;% 7%%0  %. /0 % #% %   
       
/.0  %.0#% .0  .9 %8  % %.% %. 2 . 37
02%22  .  +20% 9  00 %    $ %.   /0 % #% %  %
$4 3  %. 0#0%%  7  3.$  %. #% % 0  $ %0
00 1%.%%7%73.$%.0#%34%.$0?907%
9% .00%  # %./0 %#% %   
 
  / % .$$1 34 %. 0#% .0   %. 70 8/ % $/
.00 %.   00 37  $  %.%  $ 3  1  %. 0#%
:/90%.7% %%. #0% 7#21 00 7 %3 # 34
%.  0#% 0$ 9 1 %. #% % 0 #202% % %. 0$ 0 00 
#2%%  %  <  # 34 %. #2%4  0%0  :$%. '09  .
' %.0$ 000.32$7 %%%.>2% $00#
34 %.  0#% /. .  7#21  %.  /0 % #% %   $ 3$ % 3 %
   0 1$4 %.  +20%  $  % %   %. 7#21 00  %.  /0 %
#% % 
7 .  +20%  .8  %. 70  /. . %. 7#$ % #000 34 %.
#% % 0   /$%/ %.34%.#0%7% .#% % 0.7
#   7#$ %     %.% 
 8 %. 6$8 9$#7% ! 0
! #%% .7=2$0/ %.#  907% 6%.7#$ %%.
#% % 0  (>2 04 ! 0 / $ ## % 34 %. #2%4  0%0  :$%.
'09  .    5   <  %  34## % 1%. 6$8
9$#7%! 05720 0 704:$%.+%0 .(>2 04! 0.$
2277  $$ 10>2 04    62% % %8/
/.% .## % %.% >2 04   2%0  9 % . 3  $  3.$  %.
0#% %.% %. >2 04 / $2  %. 0#0% / $ 0/0 % %.
#2%4 0%0:$%.'09 .    .21.%. +20% 0%%.
$0 '# $ ?907% $0 % #$ %. >2 04 0#0% %    %.
7 . % 3 #$ 30 %.  +20%  . $0 '# $ ?907% $0
.$=#0.   2$%4 1%% 1 %02% / %.010%20%.020
% %8%.>2 040#0%
/8.:A3$'2#07+20% ) .8%.09 '%%&;%.0#0% 

'+ "*&'+ %0309 1%.%10>2$ %4 $2
#0%% 07=2$.07%0 1.%%/08/ %. 1 %4/. . 2 90$$4
01  3  .27 0 1.% . 2 0%  12 $  0 #   #0%%  
/707=2$.07% /08#$/. .0=%0%20"
B 2%4%.(7#$400%.00# 3$#0 /08#$%.0

19-11-2022 (Page 3 of 6) www.manupatra.com POSH AT WORK

 % %2% "
*% .$$ 3 %. 2%4  %. 7#$40 0 %.0 0# 3$ #0 
/08#$0%.0 % %2% %#09%0%0%.77  
%  =2$ .07%  % #09  %. #020 0 %.
0$2%  %%$7% 0 #02%   %  =2$ .07% 34
%8 1$$%#0>2 0
0  % "
-0%. #20#=2$.07% $22.2/$7=2$$4
%07 3.9 20/.%.0 0%$4034 7#$ % "
#.4 $%%9C
3700>2%0=2$920C
=2$$4$200708C
./ 1#010#.4C
4%.02/$7#.4 $903$0,903$2%
=2$%20
. :A3$ '2#07 +20% . $ 2 04  0%  % 0% ##0#0 %
7#$ %7. 734% %2% 1+7#$ %+77 %%%.+77 %%.$$
3.34/7%$%..$ %7730.2$3/7 *00
% #09% %. # 3 $ %4  4 #020 0 $2 07  0 $9$ %. :A3$
'2#07+20%.$0770%.#0%  #% %. 0#0%4$ 8?!

730 % %. +77 %%  . :A3$ '2#07 +20% . $ 077 0
04$1 $%20 %. 010
//6  %. 12 $  2  %. ) .8A  %. D1 $%20 . %
%.'=2$:07% 7% 08#$ 09%  0. 3 % &0$
%  .0 %0 000 %  B%. %B  . 3;%  %. %  % #09 
#0%% 1 %=2$.07%/7%/08#$0%.#09% 
00$7#$ %=2$.07%
/ 0  #0 '%  <  %. % 904 7#$40   /08#$ .$$ % %2% 
+77 %%.34/77#$4% 0$9$%/08#$0771%
%. 7#$4 $1 / %. %/ %.0
730  #0% 07 %.% 
730 07
,1907%$01 %  !,.$%.%%$
730.$$3/7 %%.
 %0 %$9$ D$ +77 %%0=#%%3% %2%34%.  %0 % ! 0
*47#$40 $%% %2%*%0$+77 %%0>2 02023,% 
'% <. $ 3$%3#2 .#0'%  %.%
/1* %.   % ##0 %.% %. 7#$ %  %. #% % 0 %    .
%30/0%%.) .8+77 %% % %/$%/ %.34! 0%
%.08 6$8
 $ ! 0## %34%. #2%4  0%0 :$%. '09 
.  . #0 1  5  <  %  
/2#0'% %.%4110 9/774787#$ %=2$
.07%  /0 % 1 % %. *%0$ +77 %% 0 D$ +77 %% / %.   #0 
%.07%.07%.%  % .#0 .%3$2$%07%.%
$%  %%.+77 %% .9 1 0% %=%%.% 7$ 7 %$ *

19-11-2022 (Page 4 of 6) www.manupatra.com POSH AT WORK

42.7#$ % %7 /0 % 1 % %.2%4%. 0  1! 004

730%. *%0$ +77 %%04
730%. D$ +77 %%.$$00
$$03$ %%%./7078 1%.7#$ % /0 % 1
/3* %.   %.21. %. 7#$ % . 3 $1 34 %. #% % 0  %. 40
%. 7#$ %.%30/0 %.0%%.*%0$+77 %%0%
%.D$+77 %%7%20%.% .0#%.9$ 7%.%%.
>2 04.37#$%0#0%.$3 $%.%%.$$1% 0%
#09 #0'% %.%7#$% %.>2 04%.+77 %%.$$
#09   0#0% % %. 7#$40 / %.   #0   % 4 07 %. % 
7#$%   %. >2 04  2. 0#0% 3 7 9 $3$ % %. 0 #0% 
$  '2. >2 04 0#0% . % 3 #$ 30 %.  +20% 9 %0 0#%
07 034%.  +20%  *%##0%.%2.>2 04 0#0% / $ % 20 . %
%.#% % 0
/ 4 . 9 $3$ 7%0 $  $ %.% %. 7#$ %  %. #% % 0 %
  /%$%/ %. 0/ %.%.#09  '=2$:07%
 7 % 08#$  09%  0. 3 %   &0$ %   60
%8 1 4    00%0% %/.%.0%.7#$ %%.#% % 0
/ $% / %.  0 / %. %. % %.  +20% #09  2  % % 7 % %.
0#%  . $0 '# $ ?907% $0 . =#0 %.% # % . 
3% 0% . 2$ % 1% 4 0#$4 07 %.  0#%  .00 %. 
+20% 34 00 %   0% %. E %  0%0 
 $ :$%.
'09 . %##030%. +20% < .! 0.$ 30%$4
9 % ##0 30 %.  +20%  *%  $ % 3 %% %.%  0% 0#% .
$$/ %.  0#%
0 
 8 6$8
 $ ! 0 %  $ %.
2%0  9 %  %.   1 % /.7 %. #% % 0 . 7 %. 7#$ %
%   
/5.#% % 0.77#$ %1 %
0 
 86$8
 $! 0
%.%..72/$7#.4 $903$2%=2$%201 %.0
%.%7#$ %/$%$%/ %. 0/ %.%.%%.>2 040#0%
 $ %9 $3$ % $$ %  :/90 . / #2% % 5208  0 704 :$%.
+%0 . #2%% /$.$$134%.#% % 0  
 
 /. ./$$34%. +20%3400%  3%.
237   7   %.0   %.% %. 0$  21.% 0  %. /0 % #% %  .
37 02%22  ! %. 904 7 #2%%  00 %. #0% 7#21 00
.3# .00%. 7#2100 $ 3$%3% 
/ 6 0 1$4 %. /0 % #% %   $$/  %. 7#21 00 %
  #34%.0#%  5     .034%
 
/7. 9 $3$ 7%0 $  $ %.% %. 7#$ %  %. #% % 0 / % $%
/ %.  0 / %. $/  . ,7#$   #09   20 '=2$
:07% 7% 08#$ 09%  0. 3 % &0$% 
$#$>2 .00%. +20% 0%%. 0%0#%%90 4
 % /.%.0 %. 7#$ %  %. #% % 0 %    / $% / %. 
0 / %. %. #09    '=2$ :07%  7 % 08#$
 09%  0. 3 %   &0$ %    %  %8 04 % 
1 %%.! 00# 3$0%.700%.7#$ %%.#% % 0%
%. +77 %% % %2% 20 %. %  >2 04 .$$ 3 7#$% / %.  
03$% 7 % +>2%$4%7 $$2#% % 0$

19-11-2022 (Page 5 of 6) www.manupatra.com POSH AT WORK

 F
2#%0*07% '$2%  9% D%

19-11-2022 (Page 6 of 6) www.manupatra.com POSH AT WORK

 MANU/DE/2337/2015
Equivalent/Neutral Citation: 2015IXAD(Delhi)569, 2015(4)SC T533(Delhi)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI

LPA 145/2015
Decided On: 06.08.2015
Gaurav Jain Vs. Hindustan Latex Family Planning Promotion Trust and Ors.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Pradeep Nandrajog and Mukta Gupta, JJ.
Counsels:
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: Anirudha Choudhury, Adv.
For Respondents/Defendant: Dayan Krishnan, Sr. Advocate instructed by Arvind Ray,
Adv.
JUDGMENT
Mukta Gupta, J.
CAVEAT 258/2015
Counsel as above appears for caveator. Caveat is discharged.
LPA 145/2015
1. Aggrieved by the order dated January 07, 2015 dismissing the writ petition filed by
the appellant Gaurav Jain, inter alia, challenging the termination order dated November
20, 2014, seeking quashing of the enquiry report and reinstatement, the appellant
prefers the present appeal.
2 . Gaurav Jain was employed as Regional Operation Manager for Technical Support
Group (TSG) of the National AIDS Control Organization (NACO) to render his services
as Team Leader on April 22, 2008 with Hindustan Latex Family Planning Promotion
Trust (in short HLFPPT). On December 31, 2013 the complainant was employed as
Operation Analyst TSG, NACO with HLFPPT for a period of 9 months on contract basis.
From 22nd to 25th July, 2014 Gaurav Jain as Team Leader along with the other team
members including the complainant went for an official visit to Hyderabad. A complaint
was made by the complainant on September 24, 2014 when her 9 months period came
to an end to the HR Department against Gaurav Jain regarding sexual harassment which
was referred to the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC). It is the case of Gaurav Jain
that despite expressing the apprehension of bias for the reason that 4 out of 5 members
of ICC were employees of HLFPPT it was not heeded to and on the ICC submitting its
enquiry report recommending the termination of Gaurav Jain, he was terminated vide
letter dated November 20, 2014. It is his case that no opportunity to make any
representation against findings and recommendations of the ICC was given to him nor
any opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses. Hence there was violation of principles
of natural justice.
3. The relevant portion of the complaint dated September 26, 2014 are as under:

04-06-2025 (Page 1 of 9) www.manupatra.com NUALS Cochin

 "Then Mr. Gaurav Jain made the plan for Hyderabad visit and as per the tour
plan I only I was to accompany him to Hyderabad for exposure visit with Mr.
Gaurav Jain. On 22nd July, 2014, evening, upon reaching Hyderabad, I found
that I was booked in the same hotel and in the same floor as of Mr. Gaurav Jain
but my other colleagues Mr. Joseph, RMM, TSG & Mr. Narasiman, SMM, TSG
were booked in some other Hotel despite the both colleagues are senior than
me in the rank. I also noted that the room booked was a double sharing (202)
and it was next to Gaurav Jain's room (204, and the fact that the tariff of the
room booked was much beyond my entitlement. Although I brought the issue to
his notice immediately, he mentioned that's okay, if there is some extra
amount, you have to pay from your pocket. But even then he was not given an
option to shift to a room with lesser tariff or a hotel with my entitlement.
On 23rd July, 2014, I was in the field with other colleagues and SMO team, till
4 pm. Then was feeling very hungry and asked my colleague M. Joseph is we
could break for lunch. He agreed and talked to Mr. Gaurav Jain and the SMO
team for lunch, after which we had lunch around 4.30 p.m., and returned to
hotel by 7.30 - 8.00 p.m., Being tired from the exhausting day's and not feeling
the need for any dinner I went off to sleep, Suddenly, in night around 9.30
p.m., Mr. Gaurav Jain called me in the intercom phone to his room asking me
to accompany me for dinner. I clearly conveyed that I was not hungry and did
not wish to have dinner more than once. But he pressurise me to come over
and share Biriyani with him for dinner in his room. Since he is very senior and
the team leader, I could not refuse and finally went to his room. When I
entered his room, he asked me to take a big plate of Biriyani, to which I again
politely refused since I was not hungry. I sat there not understanding why he is
pressurising me for the Biriyani. He then suddenly asked to see my room key,
telling that His room key is not working and so he want to use my room key.
Without realising his intention I handed my room key to him. He immediately
got up and kept that key inside his bedside table and sat in front of the table in
such a manner that I was no more able to reach the table to access my room
key. I was very scared suddenly and felt nervous. He sat on the Chair just
opposite to my Chair and then I noticed that he was drunk.
As soon as I have my room key to him he told me that I have to finish the
whole of 1/2 kg rice briyani, and unless until I finish it he will not hand over
my room key. He looked very threatening. And vicious at that time, and said
"you have two options, either you finish this entire briyani or spend entire night
in this room. You make a choice." However it took me one minute time to
comprehend the gravity of the situation. I could only request him many times to
let me go to my room, and also begged him that I cannot eat this briyani. To all
my requests he asked me = "do you know what is Shoshan (EXPLOITATION)?
and I am going to do it with you" AND HE SAID = "THIS IS CALLED SOSHAN"
He was smoking at that time, throwing the smoke on my face, degrading me
and my dignity, threatening my woman hood and looked very very intense and
spiteful. He also shouted at me telling "Why you wanted to have food from my
BLOODY Juniors? You have insulted me, and you have to pay for it". I could not
understand what he was referring to, and then he explained that the fact that at
4 p.m. that day I said to my colleagues in the field that I am hungry and want
to have lunch, was not like by him.
At that time I was very very vulnerable, threatened, scared insulted and
04-06-2025 (Page 2 of 9) www.manupatra.com NUALS Cochin
 confused. I could somehow, gather my courage and pulled my common sense,
and pushed the plate of briyani on the table and with all my strength pushed
him aside and could run out of his room. I was running in the corridor, it was
around 10 p.m., panting, feeling dizzy, and nauseated, sick I thought I would
be falling down and vomiting.
I could go to the reception area, in a panic stage, an requested the hotel to
issue me another room key, and went back to my room and locked it from
inside. I was so scared and helpless that I started to cry on my own in my
room. After a few minutes Mr. Gaurav Jain, knocked my room and rang my
room bell again. Not knowing who is knocking, I just partly opened the door
and I saw Mr. Gaurav was standing there. He asked "are you comfortable". I
said I am ok and locked the door again. I cried entire night. And awake with
panic..
On the next day, I was on field visit again as part of my work, and returned to
the hotel by late evening and locked myself. During the field visit, Mr. Gaurav
Jain directed me that 'YOU HAVE TO LEARN THE TRAVEL ETIQUETTE' and when
I asked what is the etiquette, he said - 'YOU HAVE TO ACCOMPANY YOUR
COLLEAGUES'.
Again around 8.30 p.m. there was an call in my room, this time by Mr.
Narsimha, SMM, TSG telling me that - "Gaurav Sir is waiting for you in his
room for dinner, please come to his room quickly." He mentioned that apart
from Mr. Gaurav Jain, he and Mr. Joseph Savvey and Mr. Deepak Solanki are
also in his room and they are waiting for me to join for dinner. I was in a
dilemma to answer his back as to whether I should go there or no, and told that
I will see and did not go. Again after some time he called and said - "Madam,
kitna time lagega, Sir is waiting for you". Since I did not want my other male
colleague to know my last night incident, and more over since many colleagues
were there in the room, I gathered my courage to go to Mr. Gaurav Jain's room
again, I knew that I was getting pressurised again my his new trick, but was
helpless and not in a position to negotiate, and had to go. I was very panicky
and was breathing hard as I had to walk to him room again for the second time.
Once I reached there I saw that all the male colleagues were drinking and
smoking. There was so much smoke in the room that it was nauseous. In fact
they had to call the hotel authority to open on of the secured window's and sign
a undertaking with the hotel management for doing so. They all kept on having
snacks and drink, while I was made to sit there alone for a long time. Till 11.30
at night I could not leave, as I would had to make a scene in front of others,
which I could not do without hurting my dignity.
At 11.30 p.m., there was a issue of non functional AC in Mr. Deepak Solanki's
room, which was booked in the same hotel. There was big commotion created
by Mr. Gaurav Jain over this, he called the hotel manager and wanted the entire
dinner to be compensated for the non working AC. His behavior was rude,
violent and aggressive at that time with the hotel staffs. This was all the more
scaring me, and he was very very drunk at that time. Following this he said to
me infront of all my male colleagues, = "Since there was no alternative room
available for Deepak, Deepak can shift to your room since your room has a
double sharing".
His derogatory comment on my womanhood was an sever assault. I retorted by

04-06-2025 (Page 3 of 9) www.manupatra.com NUALS Cochin

 saying - OK, I will give my room and shift to reception and spend my night
there. To this, in front of everybody, he loudly said? "MUJHE TUMPE TRUST
NEHI HAI. BUT I TRUST HIM (DEEPAK) A LOT". This was in the context of
pushing a male colleague to spend the night in my room."
4. Out of 7 charges 5 were held in favour of the complainant and against Gaurav Jain
and the 2nd and 7th charge was not decided against Gaurav Jain. The recommendations
of the 5 members of the ICC vide its report dated November 17, 2014 are as under:
"VI. Recommendation
Considering the serious nature of misconduct of the Respondent, ICC
recommends the following to the Employer i.e., HLFPPT:
(a) The Respondent, Mr. Gaurav Jain be terminated with immediate
effect in view of the findings of the ICC and the service rules of
HLFPPT.
(b) Warning to Deepak Solanki, Joseph Savy and Narsimhan for their
gender insensitive conduct towards a female colleague during
outstation travel by inviting her to a hotel room at night and drinking &
smoking by 4 male members in front of a female colleague till the
midnight. ICC also recommends counseling them on gender sensitivity.
(c) Undertake regular gender sensitization program including training
with regard to Sexual Harassment of Women at Work Place (Prevention,
Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 in all units of HLFPPT irrespective
of governance structure.
5. In the writ petition three grounds urged as noted by the learned Single Judge in Para
5 of the impugned order are:
"5. The following arguments have been urged on behalf of the petitioner:-
(i) The ICC of the respondent No. 1/employer had no jurisdiction to
enquire into the complaint inasmuch as the complaint had to be
enquired into only by respondent No. 3/National AIDS Control
Organization (NACO) with whom the petitioner was posted.
(ii) ICC has recommended punishment of removal of the petitioner
from services which is against the rules of the employer-organization.
(iii) The complaint made by the complainant was motivated and mala
fide and which becomes clear from the fact that it was made after
around two months of the trip at Hyderabad and at the stage when the
contract of the complainant with the respondent No. 1 was to expire."
6 . The learned Single Judge dealt with all the three grounds. In relation to the first
ground it was held that employer of Gaurav Jain being HLFPPT i.e. respondent No. 1, it
alone was entitled to take action against Gaurav Jain. The learned Single Judge noted
that as per Section 2(g) of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Work Place (Prevention,
Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (in short the Act) it is the management at work
place which controls the work place and only the said management has the power to
take action on a complaint of sexual harassment. Referring to Section 13(3)(i) of the
Act the learned Single Judge held that on the recommendation of ICC it was for the
04-06-2025 (Page 4 of 9) www.manupatra.com NUALS Cochin
employer to take action against the employee in accordance with the service rules and
no service rule has been pointed out by learned counsel for Gaurav Jain which provides
that an employee who is guilty of sexual harassment cannot be terminated from service.
7. The Court noted the relevant portion of the finding of the ICC in this regard and also
the statements of the witnesses Deepak Solanki and Rahul Ram who proved that
outstation trip to Hyderabad for the complainant was not required and her trip to some
field to Delhi NCR would have sufficed. The Court also noted the evidence that Gaurav
Jain himself confirmed in his statement that he had done the booking of Hotel Sarovar
Aditya Hometel for himself and complainant for 22nd July to 25th July and for Deepak
for 24th July, 2014. He also did the web checking for the complainant and himself for
on-going flight to Hyderabad from Delhi, the statement of Gaurav Jain also confirms
that the room booked for complainant was over and above the hotel entitlement in
terms of tariff for the complainant and Gaurav Jain had no satisfactory explanation
thereof. The Court also noted the finding of the ICC that the complainant was allotted
superior room No. 202 on the second floor in Hotel on checking in on 22nd July and
Gaurav Jain was allotted superior room No. 115 but within 14 minutes he changed his
room to Suite No. 204 on the same floor next to the complainant's room. Further Joseph
Savy who had checked in the same hotel Aditya Hometel on October 22, 2014 at 7.00
A.M. was directed to check in at another hotel next to Hotel Aditya Hometel, which was
done by Deepak on instructions from Gaurav Jain. Thus from the evidence on record as
noted in the enquiry report the learned Single Judge rejected the contention of learned
counsel for the appellant that this was a case of no evidence and the complaint was
motivated and mala fide and made after around two months of the trip at Hyderabad at
the stage when the contract of the complainant was to expire.
8. As regards delay in making the complaint the learned Single Judge noted that merely
for delay the complaint could not be thrown out and the allegations of the complainant
were supported by the statements of number of other witnesses from the staff of
respondent No. 1 who stated about a similar trend of game plan adopted by Gaurav Jain
and that after the complainant came back from the trip she was found distressed and
tense.
9. The relevant portions of the findings of the ICC are as under:
"From the Statement of Latha Kumari, Nitin Sharma, Purujit, Sudarshan,
Bhupendra, it is apparent that this was the trend with all women staff who had
joined and left TSG, that they would be taken for an outstation trip the
Respondent, where the booking of hotel and web check in for flights will be all
done by the Respondent or on his instructions, and that after the visit there
would be visible change in relation between Respondent and the female teams
member and has also seen girls looking distressed and tensed after coming
back from outstation visits.
It has also come to light that the Complainant was warned repeatedly by other
female colleagues before they left the organization, that overnight travel and
stay with the Respondent is not at all safe and will be very dangerous for her,
and that complainant was very scared to undertake overnight stays with the
Respondent. It has also come in evidence that Latha Kumari had accompanied
Complainant in a review meeting held at Stellar Hotel which included overnight
stay, since Complainant was very scared to go alone as there was no other
female staff in the review meeting.

04-06-2025 (Page 5 of 9) www.manupatra.com NUALS Cochin

 Respondent also misbehaved with women staff in the past as narrated by them
to Latha Kumari, She has further stated that Respondent has forced all women
staff to state to the HR that they had no problem in TSG (reference to
Vibhanini's exit reason), otherwise he would have made life miserable for her.
It is evident that the Respondent's looks and behavior had often made women's
staff feel uncomfortable and that he had been continuously misbehaving with all
female staff and passing personal humiliating comments within the office in
front of other male colleagues and external stakeholders. From the statement of
Latha Kumari, Deepak Sati and Sudarshan Negi, it is obvious that TSG Staff was
scared of raising voice against the Respondent since if the Respondent comes to
know would definitely make life miserable for them. From the statement of
Sudarshan Negi and Nitin Sharma's, it is apparent that women staff working in
TSG that were not of senior level, and not matured and did not have any
support system, they are not able to handle harassment by the Respondent
Nitin Kumar Sharma has even gone to the extent by saying that all female
members in TSG work for very short span because this place is "HELL FOR
WOMEN". In fact, it has also come into evidence that that perceived threat to
female staff was so high that Latha had even called Joseph Savy, the Regional
Manager for South before the Hyderabad trip mentioned above to request him
(Joseph) to take care of the Complainant, on a personal note. The Respondents
objection that why Latha had to call only Joseph to take care of the
Complainant cannot be the sole basis to discard her statement.
Deepak Sati has also state before the ICC that the Respondent use to pass
objectionable remarks and always narrates instances related to sex & rape case
among other headlines of newspapers/current affairs in presence of all team
members including female staff during the lunch time. He further added that
despite the fact team members detest these lunch time stories however, they do
not have the courage to protest him.
ICC has also recorded statements of some of the staff of TSG. From their
statements, it is clear that TSG staff observed the women to be distressed,
depressed, agitated after coming back from outstation visits with the
Respondent, and some of them have openly expressed what they have
experienced with some of their trusted and supportive colleagues. More than
one woman colleague has reached out to the complainant and warned her of
Respondent's behavior while outstation trip, and asked the complainant to be
very careful to maintain her dignity. Some of TSG Staff have even gone on the
extent of saying, "There is no humanity left", "it is completely male dominated",
"Respondent has "ensured that there is no ambience that any staff can provide
professional/emotional support/protest against exploitation to any female staff,
since the respondent will spill the peace and reputation of that staff", "the
indecency, torture, and domination over even male and that too very senior
staff by the respondent is so severe, that god only knows the plight of these
very junior, low in hierarchy naive, young vulnerable women staff."
It has also come to light that the Respondent had been habitually cracking
obscene Sexual jokes, shares stories of rapes, - "ladki uthake program kar lia"
(referring to incidents of rape), how women enjoy rape and then as and when
required complain on rape, comments on body and body parts of women during
common lunch hours are detestable/protest (As per statements of Sudarshan
Negi, Latha Kumari, Nitin Kumar Sharma, Deepak Sati, Purujit Praharaj).

04-06-2025 (Page 6 of 9) www.manupatra.com NUALS Cochin

 More than one witnesses above have narrated before the ICC that Respondent
has number of times insisted the need for recruiting female employees in Delhi
TSG office, and not taking the opinion of the reporting supervisor in account.
More than one witnesses also narrated before the ICC that this Hyderabad
incident, is not a single incident, but this is a known trend in TSG, whereby
young, new, junior, inexperienced, vulnerable woman employee had to
undertake outstations trips with the Respondent and in all these occasions,
Respondent is the only person to decide who will go where, with whom, how
and when. More than one witnesses also mentioned that after these (outstation)
trips, either the Respondent Jain will start extending extra favour and suggest
promotion for the woman employee, or start harassing and crafting a "GAME-
PLAN" (as quoted by more than one team member), pressurizing few of his
close associates, to put pressure and harass the woman employee to leave TSG.
The Respondent has argued that, if some female colleague had informed them
about their apprehension about travelling with Respondent then Latha should
have either shared with Senior Management of HLFPPT or HLL Life care without
informing Respondent or she could have suggested Complainant to inform or
write mail to share her apprehension with HR for easy redressal. He questioned
as to why Latha had kept quiet for about 6 yrs and now suddenly she realized
everything. The Respondent has also stated that if Mr. Sudarshan Negi being a
senior manager in TSG has noticed historical trends in behavior of female staff
then why did he not share it with HLFPPT senior member of HR team who are
quite easy statement of other witnesses. However, ICC cannot lose sight of the
fact that the TSG staff has come out in support of the Complainant because it is
for the first time that a victim has raised voice against the Respondent. A victim
of sexual harassment needs lot of courage and support to raise voice against
the culprit, who has assaulted a women's dignity, especially in the male
dominated Indian society. The ICC noted that the complainant is young and
unmarried. The father committee also understands her vulnerability in the
context that very recently she has lost her father and staying with her working
mother and a younger sister without much support of the male member in her
family. The committee found her emotionally drained and noted her
determination to bring justice to her dignity. The committee with 3 women
members could also bring out her fear, doubts and lever of stigma that she has
inflicted on herself following the incidents on 23rd and 24th July, and bearing
its consequences till the date of complaint, at her workplace. The facts that
several staff have supported the case of the Petitioner, despite being acquainted
with the misdeeds of the Respondent and not having raised objections earlier,
further fortifies the fact that such staff got courage to speak against the
Respondent due to the courage and boldness shown by the complainant. Merely
because, no grievance has been raised against the Respondent in the past
cannot be a ground to absolve the Respondent. Hence, the ICC does not find
much force in the Respondent's objections to reject the evidence tendered by
the TSG staff regarding the past mis-behaviour by the Respondent."
10. Before this Court learned counsel for the appellant urges that he was not given any
opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses and thus there was denial of principles of
natural justice. This point has not been urged before the learned Single Judge. But we
deal with the same.
11. As noted above, Gaurav Jain was directed to attend the hearing on October 15,
2015 which he failed to do so, and thus the Committee immediately gave statements as
04-06-2025 (Page 7 of 9) www.manupatra.com NUALS Cochin
is evident from Annexure P-10 to the writ petition, to which Gaurav Jain responded by
detailed reply on October 21, 2014 running into 10 pages. The main request in the
response was the right to verbally cross-examine the witnesses. It is well settled that in
enquiry proceedings strict rules of evidence are not required to be followed and the
enquiry committee can adopt its own procedure in conformity with the principles of
natural justice and especially in a case of sexual harassment. In the present case
principles of natural justice has been adhered as the response of Gaurav Jain was
sought for, tendered by him, which version was duly considered.
1 2 . In the decision reported as MANU/SC/0332/1977 : (1977) 2 SCC 491 State of
Haryana and Anr. Vs. Rattan Singh the Supreme Court held:
"4. It is well settled that in a domestic enquiry the strict and sophisticated rules
of evidence under the Indian Evidence Act may not apply. All materials which
are logically probative for a prudent mind are permissible. There is no allergy
to hearsay evidence provided it has reasonable nexus and credibility. It is true
that departmental authorities and Administrative Tribunals must be careful in
evaluating such material and should not glibly swallow what is strictly speaking
not relevant under the Indian Evidence Act. For this proposition it is not
necessary to cite decisions nor text books, although we have been taken
through case-law and other authorities by counsel on both sides. The essence
of a judicial approach is objectivity, exclusion of extraneous materials or
considerations and observance of rules of natural justice. Of course, fairplay is
the basis and if perversity or arbitrariness, bias or surrender of independence of
judgment vitiate the conclusions reached, such finding, even though of a
domestic tribunal, cannot be held good. However, the courts below misdirected
themselves, perhaps, in insisting that passengers who had come in and gone
out should be chased and brought before the tribunal before a valid finding
could be recorded. The 'residuum' rule to which counsel for the respondent
referred, based upon certain passages from American Jurisprudence does not
go to that extent nor does the passage from Halsbury insist on such rigid
requirement. The simple point is, was there some evidence or was there no
evidence -- not in the sense of the technical rules governing regular court
proceedings but in a fair commonsense way as men of understanding and
worldly wisdom will accept. Viewed in this way, sufficiency of evidence in proof
of the finding by a domestic tribunal is beyond scrutiny. Absence of any
evidence in support of a finding is certainly available for the court to look into
because it amounts to an error of law apparent on the record. We find, in this
case, that the evidence of Chamanlal, Inspector of the Flying Squad, is some
evidence which has relevance to the charge levelled against the respondent.
Therefore, we are unable to hold that the order is invalid on that ground."
13. Since after supplying the statements of the witnesses response was sought from
Gaurav Jain which he tendered, there is no denial of principles of natural justice.
Further this is not a case of no evidence and as laid down by the Supreme Court
sufficiency of evidence is beyond the scrutiny of this Court which does not sit as an
appellate authority to the inquiry proceedings. On the facts and circumstances of the
case as noted above we find no error in the impugned order of the learned Single Judge
dismissing the writ petition and upholding the order of termination of Gaurav Jain. The
appeal is dismissed.
CM 4724/2015 (stay)

04-06-2025 (Page 8 of 9) www.manupatra.com NUALS Cochin

Dismissed as infructuous.
© Manupatra Information Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

04-06-2025 (Page 9 of 9) www.manupatra.com NUALS Cochin

 MANU/SC/0898/2012
Equivalent/Neutral Citation: AIR2013SC 93, AIR2013SC 93, 2013(2)ALD26, 2013(1)BLJ14, 2012BomC R(C ri)811, IV(2012)C C R454(SC ),
2012(III)C LR797, 2012(2)C WC 960, 2013(3)EC rN 645, ILR2012(4)Kerala451, 2013(1)J.L.J.R.22, JT2012(10)SC 598, 2013(3)KarLJ562, 2013LabIC 512,
2013LabIC 512, 2013-2-LW554, 2013-1-LW(C rl)396, 2012MLJ(C rl)599, 2013(I)OLR481, 2013(1)PLJR40, 2012(4)RC R(C riminal)972,
2012(10)SC ALE458, (2013)1SC C 297, (2013)1SC C 297, (2013)1SC C (LS)159, [2012]9SC R895

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Writ Petition (Criminal) Nos. 173-177 of 1999, Transferred Case (Civil) No. 21 of 2001
and Civil Appeal Nos. 5009 and 5010 of 2006 (Under Article 32 of the Constitution of
India)
Decided On: 19.10.2012
Medha Kotwal Lele and Ors. Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
R.M. Lodha, Anil R. Dave and Ranjan Gogoi, JJ.
Counsels:
For Appearing Parties: A. Mariarputham, AG, Colin Gonsalves, T.S. Doabia, Sr. Advs.,
Manish Singhvi, AAG, Jayshree Satpute, Jyoti Mendiratta, Aparna Bhat, S. Udaya Kumar
Sagar, Krishna Kumar Singh, Praseena E. Joseph, Advs. for Lawyer's Knit and Co.,
Sunita Sharma, Sadhana Sandhu, B.V. Balaram Das, Sushma Suri, M.S. Doabia, Asha
Gopalan Nair, Sudarshan Singh Rawat, Rashmi Malhotra, D.S. Mahra, B. Balaji, J.M.
Khanna, Anil Shrivastav, Rituraj Biswas, Hemantika Wahi, Shail Kumar Dwivedi, Tara
Chandra Sharma, Ashok Mathur, Abhijit Sengupta, Riku Sarma, Navneet Kumar, Advs.
for Corporate Law Group, Milind Kumar, Ranjan Mukherjee, S. Bhowmick, S.C. Ghosh,
Sushil Kumar Jain, A. Subhashini, Guntur Prabhakar, Rajeev Sharma, Sanjay R. Hegde,
V.G. Pragasam, S. Joseph Aristotle, Prabu Ramasubramanian, Anuvrat Sharma, G.
Prakash, T.V. George, Meenakshi Arora, Vasav Anantharaman, Naresh K. Sharma,
Khwairakpam Nobin Singh, Sapam Biswajit Meitei, Shreekant N. Terdal, V.D. Khanna,
Aruna Mathur, Novita, Advs. for Arputham, Aruna and Co., Rachana Srivastava, B.S.
Banthia, Kamakshi S. Mehlwal, Deba Prasad Mohanty, Advs. for Parekh and Co., V.N.
Raghupathy, Hari Shankar K., Abhinav Mukherji, Pramod Dayal, Ardhendumauli Kumar
Prasad, Madhu Sikri, Chira Ranjan Addy, Shrish Kumar Mishra, Praveen Swarup, Akshay
Verma, Sushma Verma, Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, Pragati Nikhara, Mukul Singh,
Aruneshwar Gupta, H.S. Parihar, Gopal Prasad, P.V. Yogeswaran, Atul Jha, Sandeep Jha,
Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, Arun Kumar Sinha, Ratan Kumar Choudhuri, Sunil Fernandes,
Shashank Kumar Lal, S. Thananjayan, P.V. Dinesh, Advs. Mitter and Mitter Co., Gopal
Singh, Dinesh Kumar Garg, Chandan Ramamurthi, Shivaji M. Jadhav, Sunil Kumar
Verma, Bina Madhavan, Jogy Scaria, E. Enatoli Sema, Amit Kumar Singh, D. Mahesh
Babu, Mayur R. Shah and Amit K. Nain, Advs.
JUDGMENT
R.M. Lodha, J.
1. The Vishaka and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. MANU/SC/0786/1997 : (1997)
6 SCC 241 judgment came on 13.8.1997. Yet, 15 years after the guidelines were laid
down by this Court for the prevention and redressal of sexual harassment and their due
compliance under Article 141 of the Constitution of India until such time appropriate
legislation was enacted by the Parliament, many women still struggle to have their most

04-06-2025 (Page 1 of 12) www.manupatra.com NUALS Cochin

basic rights protected at workplaces. The statutory law is not in place. The Protection of
Women Against Sexual Harassment at Work Place Bill, 2010 is still pending in
Parliament though Lok Sabha is said to have passed that Bill in the first week of
September, 2012. The belief of the Constitution framers in fairness and justice for
women is yet to be fully achieved at the workplaces in the country.
2 . This group of four matters - in the nature of public interest litigation - raises
principally the grievance that women continue to be victims of sexual harassment at
workplaces. The guidelines in Vishaka MANU/SC/0786/1997 : (1997) 6 SCC 241 are
followed in breach in substance and spirit by state functionaries and all other
concerned. The women workers are subjected to harassment through legal and extra
legal methods and they are made to suffer insult and indignity.
3 . Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, inter alia, states, "Violence against
women both violates and impairs or nullifies the enjoyment by women of human rights
and fundamental freedoms....... In all societies, to a greater or lesser degree, women
and girls are subjected to physical, sexual and psychological abuse that cuts across
lines of income, class and culture".
4. Vishaka guidelines require the employers at workplaces as well as other responsible
persons or institutions to observe them and ensure the prevention of sexual harassment
to women. These guidelines read as under:
1. Duty of the employer or other responsible persons in workplaces and other
institutions:
It shall be the duty of the employer or other responsible persons in
workplaces or other institutions to prevent or deter the commission of
acts of sexual harassment and to provide the procedures for the
resolution, settlement or prosecution of acts of sexual harassment by
taking all steps required.
2. Definition:
For this purpose, sexual harassment includes such unwelcome sexually
determined behaviour (whether directly or by implication) as:
(a) physical contact and advances;
(b) a demand or request for sexual favours;
(c) sexually-coloured remarks;
(d) showing pornography;
(e) any other unwelcome physical, verbal or nonverbal conduct
of sexual nature.
Where any of these acts is committed in circumstances whereunder the
victim of such conduct has a reasonable apprehension that in relation
to the victim's employment or work whether she is drawing salary, or
honorarium or voluntary, whether in government, public or private
enterprise such conduct can be humiliating and may constitute a health
and safety problem. It is discriminatory for instance when the woman
has reasonable grounds to believe that her objection would
04-06-2025 (Page 2 of 12) www.manupatra.com NUALS Cochin
 disadvantage her in connection with her employment or work including
recruiting or promotion or when it creates a hostile work environment.
Adverse consequences might be visited if the victim does not consent
to the conduct in question or raises any objection thereto.
3. Preventive steps:
All employers or persons in charge of workplace whether in the public
or private sector should take appropriate steps to prevent sexual
harassment. Without prejudice to the generality of this obligation they
should take the following steps:
(a) Express prohibition of sexual harassment as defined above
at the workplace should be notified, published and circulated in
appropriate ways.
(b) The rules/Regulations of government and public sector
bodies relating to conduct and discipline should include
rules/Regulations prohibiting sexual harassment and provide
for appropriate penalties in such rules against the offender.
(c) As regards private employers steps should be taken to
include the aforesaid prohibitions in the standing orders under
the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946.
(d) Appropriate work conditions should be provided in respect
of work, leisure, health and hygiene to further ensure that
there is no hostile environment towards women at workplaces
and no woman employee should have reasonable grounds to
believe that she is disadvantaged in connection with her
employment.
4. Criminal proceedings:
Where such conduct amounts to a specific offence under the Indian
Penal Code or under any other law, the employer shall initiate
appropriate action in accordance with law by making a complaint with
the appropriate authority.
In particular, it should ensure that victims, or witnesses are not
victimized or discriminated against while dealing with complaints of
sexual harassment. The victims of sexual harassment should have the
option to seek transfer of the perpetrator or their own transfer.
5. Disciplinary action:
Where such conduct amounts to misconduct in employment as defined
by the relevant service rules, appropriate disciplinary action should be
initiated by the employer in accordance with those rules.
6. Complaint mechanism:
Whether or not such conduct constitutes an offence under law or a
breach of the service rules, an appropriate complaint mechanism
should be created in the employer's organization for redress of the
04-06-2025 (Page 3 of 12) www.manupatra.com NUALS Cochin
 complaint made by the victim. Such complaint mechanism should
ensure time-bound treatment of complaints.
7. Complaints Committee:
The complaint mechanism, referred to in (6) above, should be adequate
to provide, where necessary, a Complaints Committee, a special
counsellor or other support service, including the maintenance of
confidentiality.
The Complaints Committee should be headed by a woman and not less
than half of its members should be women. Further, to prevent the
possibility of any undue pressure or influence from senior levels, such
Complaints Committee should involve a third party, either NGO or other
body who is familiar with the issue of sexual harassment.
The Complaints Committee must make an annual report to the
Government Department concerned of the complaints and action taken
by them.
The employers and person-in-charge will also report on the compliance
with the aforesaid guidelines including on the reports of the Complaints
Committee to the Government Department.
8. Workers' initiative:
Employees should be allowed to raise issues of sexual harassment at
workers' meeting and in other appropriate forum and it should be
affirmatively discussed in employer-employee meetings.
9. Awareness:
Awareness of the rights of female employees in this regard should be
created in particular by prominently notifying the guidelines (and
appropriate legislation when enacted on the subject) in a suitable
manner.
10. Third-party harassment:
Where sexual harassment occurs as a result of an act or omission by
any third party or outsider, the employer and person-in-charge will
take all steps necessary and reasonable to assist the affected person in
terms of support and preventive action.
11. The Central/State Governments are requested to consider adopting suitable
measures including legislation to ensure that the guidelines laid down by this
order are also observed by the employers in private sector.
12. These guidelines will not prejudice any rights available under the Protection
of Human Rights Act, 1993.
5. In these matters while highlighting few individual cases of sexual harassment at the
workplaces, the main focus is on the lack of effective implementation of Vishaka
guidelines. It is stated that the attitude of neglect in establishing effective and
comprehensive mechanism in letter and spirit of the Vishaka guidelines by the States as
04-06-2025 (Page 4 of 12) www.manupatra.com NUALS Cochin
well as the employers in private and public sector has defeated the very objective and
purpose of the guidelines.
6 . In one of these matters, Medha Kotwal Lele, this Court has passed certain orders
from time to time. Notices were issued to all the State Governments. The States have
filed their responses. On 26.4.2004, after hearing the learned Attorney General and
learned Counsel for the States, this Court directed as follows:
Complaints Committee as envisaged by the Supreme Court in its judgment in
Vishaka's case will be deemed to be an inquiry authority for the purposes of
Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964 (hereinafter called CCS Rules) and
the report of the complaints Committee shall be deemed to be an inquiry report
under the CCS Rules. Thereafter the disciplinary authority will act on the report
in accordance with the rules.
This Court further directed in the order dated 26.4.2004 that similar amendment shall
be carried out in the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Rules. As regards
educational institutions and other establishments, the Court observed that further
directions would be issued subsequently.
7. On 17.1.2006, this Court in couple of these matters passed the following order:
These matters relate to the complaints of sexual harassment in working places.
In Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan MANU/SC/0786/1997 : (1997) 6 SCC 241,
this Court issued certain directions as to how to deal with the problem. All the
States were parties to that proceedings. Now, it appears that the directions
issued in Vishaka case were not properly implemented by the various
States/Departments/Institutions. In a rejoinder affidavit filed on behalf of the
Petitioners, the details have been furnished. The counsel appearing for the
States submit that they would do the needful at the earliest. It is not known
whether the Committees as suggested in Vishaka case have been constituted in
all the Departments/Institutions having members of the staff 50 and above and
in most of the District level offices in all the States members of the staff
working in some offices would be more than 50. It is not known whether the
Committees as envisaged in the Vishaka case have been constituted in all these
offices. The number of complaints received and the steps taken in these
complaints are also not available. We find it necessary to give some more
directions in this regard. We find that in order to co-ordinate the steps taken in
this regard, there should be a State level officer, i.e., either the Secretary of the
Woman and Child Welfare Department or any other suitable officer who is in
charge and concerned with the welfare of women and children in each State.
The Chief Secretaries of each State shall see that an officer is appointed as a
nodal agent to collect the details and to give suitable directions whenever
necessary.
As regards factories, shops and commercial establishments are concerned, the
directions are not fully complied with. The Labour Commissioner of each State
shall take steps in that direction. They shall work as nodal agency as regards
shops, factories, shops and commercial establishments are concerned. They
shall also collect the details regarding the complaints and also see that the
required Committee is established in such institutions.
Counsel appearing for each State shall furnish the details as to what steps have
been taken in pursuance of this direction within a period of eight weeks. Details
04-06-2025 (Page 5 of 12) www.manupatra.com NUALS Cochin
 may be furnished as shown in the format furnished by the Petitioners in the
paperbooks. A copy of this format shall form part of the order. The above facts
are required at the next date of hearing. A copy of this order be sent to the
Chief Secretary and Chief Labour Commissioner of each State for taking suitable
action.
8. From the affidavits filed by the State Governments the following position emerges in
respect of each of these States:
GOA
The amendments in the Civil Services Conduct Rules and the Standing Orders
have not been made so far.
GUJARAT
No amendments in the Civil Services Conduct Rules and the Standing Orders
have been made so far. It is not stated that all Complaints Committees are
headed by women. There is no information given whether in such committees
NGO members have been associated.
NCT of DELHI
The amendments in the Civil Services Conduct Rules have been made. The
position about amendments in the Standing Orders has not been clarified. It
has not been specified that all Complaints Committees are headed by women.
HIMACHAL PRADESH
There is nothing to indicate that the State of Himachal Pradesh has made
amendments in the Civil Services Conduct Rules and the Standing Orders. No
details of formation of Complaints Committees have been given.
HARYANA
The amendments in the Government Employees (Conduct) Rules, 1966 have
been made. However, it is not specified that the amendments in Standing
Orders have been made.
MAHARASHTRA
Necessary amendments in Maharashtra Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1974
have been made. The Labour Commissioner has taken steps for amending
Mumbai Industrial Employment (Permanent Orders) Rules, 1959.
MIZORAM
The State of Mizoram has amended Civil Services Conduct Rules and also
constituted Central Complaints Committee to look into complaints pertaining to
cases of sexual harassment of working women at all workplaces for
preservation and enforcement. A notification has been issued giving necessary
directions to all private bodies.
SIKKIM

04-06-2025 (Page 6 of 12) www.manupatra.com NUALS Cochin

 The amendments in the Civil Services Conduct Rules have been carried out and
a notification has been issued for constitution of complaints committees by
departments/institutions with 50 or above staff to look into sexual harassment
of women at workplaces.
UTTARANCHAL
The State of Uttaranchal has carried out amendments in Civil Services Conduct
Rules as well as the Standing Orders. The District Level and State Level
Complaints Committees have been constituted.
WEST BENGAL
The amendments in the Rules relating to duties, rights and obligations of
government employees have been made. The amendments in the Standing
Orders have been carried out. Out of 56 departments of Government of West
Bengal, Complaints Committees have been formed in 48 departments and out of
156 Directorates under the Government, Complaints Committees have been
formed in 34 Directorates. of 24 institutions under the Government, Complaints
Committees have been formed in 6.
MADHYA PRADESH
Although State of Madhya Pradesh has made amendments in the Civil Services
Conduct Rules but no amendments have been made in the Standing Orders. The
Complaints Committees have been constituted in every office of every
department right from the Head of the Department level to the District and
Taluka level. The District Level Committees have been constituted under the
chairmanship of the District Collector. The steps taken by the District
Committees are monitored by the nodal departments.
PUNJAB
The State of Punjab has carried out amendments in the Civil Services Conduct
Rules as well as the Standing Orders. 70 Complaints Committees have been
constituted at the headquarters of different Directorates and 58 Complaints
Committees have been constituted in various Field Offices.
ORISSA
No amendments in the Civil Services Conduct Rules and the Standing Orders
have been made.
ANDHRA PRADESH
Amendments in the Civil Services Conduct Rules and in the Standing Orders
have been made.
KARNATAKA
The amendments in the Civil Services Conduct Rules have been made by the
State of Karnataka but no amendments have been made in the Standing Orders.
It is stated that in most of the committees, the number of women members is
above 50%. The Chairpersons are women and in most of the committees, an
outside member, i.e., an NGO has been associated.
04-06-2025 (Page 7 of 12) www.manupatra.com NUALS Cochin
 RAJASTHAN
The State of Rajasthan has carried out amendments in the Civil Services
Conduct Rules but no amendments have been carried out in the Standing
Orders.
BIHAR
The State of Bihar has made amendments in the Civil Services Conduct Rules
but there is nothing to show that amendments in Standing Orders have been
made. However, only one Complaints Committee has been constituted for the
entire State.
MEGHALAYA
The State of Meghalaya has neither carried out amendments in the Civil
Services Conduct Rules nor in the Standing Orders.
TRIPURA
The State of Tripura has carried out the amendments in the Civil Services
Conduct Rules. There are no Standing Orders applicable in the State. 97
Complaints Committees have been constituted in most of the state government
departments and organisations.
ASSAM
Amendments in the Civil Services Conduct Rules have been made but no
amendments have been carried out in the Standing Orders.
MANIPUR
The State of Manipur has carried out amendments in the Civil Services Conduct
Rules, but no definite information has been given regarding amendments in the
Standing Orders. Only one Complaints Committee has been formed for the
entire State.
UTTAR PRADESH
Amendments both in the Civil Services Conduct Rules and the Standing Orders
have been carried out.
JAMMU and KASHMIR
The State of Jammu and Kashmir has carried out amendments in the Civil
Services Conduct Rules. It is stated that steps are being taken for amendments
in the Standing Orders.
NAGALAND
The amendments have been carried out in the Civil Services Conduct Rules by
the State of Nagaland but no amendments have been carried out in the
Standing Orders.
ARUNACHAL PRADESH

04-06-2025 (Page 8 of 12) www.manupatra.com NUALS Cochin

 The State of Arunachal Pradesh has neither carried out amendments in the Civil
Services Conduct Rules nor in the Standing Orders. There is only one State
Level Committee for the entire State of Arunachal Pradesh.
KERALA
Amendments in the Civil Services Conduct Rules and in the Standing Orders
have been carried out. There are 52 Complaints Committees in the State. All
such committees are headed by women and 50% members of these committees
are women and there is representation of NGO members in these committees.
TAMILNADU
The State of Tamil Nadu has carried out amendments in the Civil Services
Conduct Rules. However, no amendments in the Standing Orders have been
made so far.
JHARKHAND
The State of Jharkhand has carried out amendments in the Civil Services
Conduct Rules. However, no amendments in the Standing Orders have been
made so far.
9 . From the affidavits filed by the State Governments, it transpires that the States of
Orissa, Meghalaya, Himachal Pradesh, Goa, Arunachal Pradesh and West Bengal have
amended the Rules relating to duties, public rights and obligations of the government
employees but have not made amendments in Civil Services Conduct Rules. Similarly,
the States of Sikkim, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Mizoram, Orissa, Bihar, Jammu &
Kashmir, Manipur, Karnataka, Rajasthan, Meghalaya, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh,
Assam, NCT of Delhi, Goa, Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh, Jharkhand and Tamil Nadu
have not carried out amendments in the Standing Orders. These States appear to have
not implemented the order passed by this Court on 26.4.2004 quoted above. The States
which have carried out amendments in the Civil Services Conduct Rules and the
Standing Orders have not provided that the report of the Complaints Committee shall be
treated as a report in the disciplinary proceedings by an Inquiry Officer. What has been
provided by these States is that the inquiry, findings and recommendations of the
Complaints Committee shall be treated as a mere preliminary investigation leading to a
disciplinary action against the delinquent.
10. The States like Rajasthan, Meghalaya, Himachal Pradesh, Assam and Jammu and
Kashmir seem to have not formed Complaints Committees as envisaged in the Vishaka
guidelines. Some States have constituted only one Complaints Committee for the entire
State.
1 1 . 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 does not seem to have carried
out amendments in the Civil Services Conduct Rules. Some of the Union Territories like
Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Chandigarh are reported to have not yet formed Complaints
Committees. Daman and Diu have formed one Complaints Committee for the Union
Territory.
12. While we have marched forward substantially in bringing gender parity in local self-
governments but the representation of women in Parliament and the Legislative

04-06-2025 (Page 9 of 12) www.manupatra.com NUALS Cochin

Assemblies is dismal as the women represent only 10-11 per cent of the total seats.
India ranks 129 out of 147 countries in United Nations Gender Equality Index. This is
lower than all South-Asian Countries except Afghanistan. Our Constitution framers
believed in fairness and justice for women. They provided in the Constitution the States'
commitment of gender parity and gender equality and guarantee against sexual
harassment to women.
13. The implementation of the guidelines in Vishaka has to be not only in form but
substance and spirit so as to make available safe and secure environment to women at
the workplace in every aspect and thereby enabling the working women to work with
dignity, decency and due respect. There is still no proper mechanism in place to address
the complaints of sexual harassment of the women lawyers in Bar Associations, lady
doctors and nurses in the medical clinics and nursing homes, women architects working
in the offices of the engineers and architects and so on and so forth.
14. In Seema Lepcha v. State of Sikkim and Ors. MANU/SC/0203/2012 Petition for
Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 34153/2010 decided on 3.2.2012 this Court gave the
following directions:
(i) The State Government shall give comprehensive publicity to the notifications
and orders issued by it in compliance of the guidelines framed by this Court in
Vishaka's case and the directions given in Medha Kotwal's case by getting the
same published in the newspapers having maximum circulation in the State
after every two months.
(ii) Wide publicity be given every month on Doordarshan Station, Sikkim about
various steps taken by the State Government for implementation of the
guidelines framed in Vishaka's case and the directions given in Medha Kotwal's
case.
(iii) Social Welfare Department and the Legal Service Authority of the State of
Sikkim shall also give wide publicity to the notifications and orders issued by
the State Government not only for the Government departments of the State
and its agencies/instrumentalities but also for the private companies.
15. As a largest democracy in the world, we have to combat violence against women.
We are of the considered view that the existing laws, if necessary, be revised and
appropriate new laws be enacted by Parliament and the State Legislatures to protect
women from any form of indecency, indignity and disrespect at all places (in their
homes as well as outside), prevent all forms of violence - domestic violence, sexual
assault, sexual harassment at the workplace, etc; -- and provide new initiatives for
education and advancement of women and girls in all spheres of life. After all they have
limitless potential. Lip service, hollow statements and inert and inadequate laws with
sloppy enforcement are not enough for true and genuine upliftment of our half most
precious population - the women.
16. In what we have discussed above, we are of the considered view that guidelines in
Vishaka should not remain symbolic and the following further directions are necessary
until legislative enactment on the subject is in place.
(i) The States and Union Territories which have not yet carried out adequate
and appropriate amendments in their respective Civil Services Conduct Rules
(By whatever name these Rules are called) shall do so within two months from
today by providing that the report of the Complaints Committee shall be
04-06-2025 (Page 10 of 12) www.manupatra.com NUALS Cochin
 deemed to be an inquiry report in a disciplinary action under such Civil Services
Conduct Rules. In other words, the disciplinary authority shall treat the
report/findings etc. of the Complaints Committee as the findings in a
disciplinary inquiry against the delinquent employee and shall act on such
report accordingly. The findings and the report of the Complaints Committee
shall not be treated as a mere preliminary investigation or inquiry leading to a
disciplinary action but shall be treated as a finding/report in an inquiry into the
misconduct of the delinquent.
(ii) The States and Union Territories which have not carried out amendments in
the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Rules shall now carry out
amendments on the same lines, as noted above in Clause (i) within two
months.
(iii) The States and Union Territories shall form adequate number of Complaints
Committees so as to ensure that they function at taluka level, district level and
state level. Those States and/or Union Territories which have formed only one
Committee for the entire State shall now form adequate number of Complaints
Committees within two months from today. Each of such Complaints
Committees shall be headed by a woman and as far as possible in such
Committees an independent member shall be associated.
(iv) The State functionaries and private and public sector
undertakings/organisations/bodies/institutions etc. shall put in place sufficient
mechanism to ensure full implementation of the Vishaka guidelines and further
provide that if the alleged harasser is found guilty, the complainant - victim is
not forced to work with/under such harasser and where appropriate and
possible the alleged harasser should be transferred. Further provision should be
made that harassment and intimidation of witnesses and the complainants shall
be met with severe disciplinary action.
(v) The Bar Council of India shall ensure that all bar associations in the country and
persons registered with the State Bar Councils follow the Vishaka guidelines. Similarly,
Medical Council of India, Council of Architecture, Institute of Chartered Accountants,
Institute of Company Secretaries and other statutory Institutes shall ensure that the
organisations, bodies, associations, institutions and persons registered/affiliated with
them follow the guidelines laid down by Vishaka. To achieve this, necessary
instructions/circulars shall be issued by all the statutory bodies such as Bar Council of
India, Medical Council of India, Council of Architecture, Institute of Company
Secretaries within two months from today. On receipt of any complaint of sexual
harassment at any of the places referred to above the same shall be dealt with by the
statutory bodies in accordance with the Vishaka guidelines and the guidelines in the
present order.
17. We are of the view that if there is any non-compliance or non-adherence to the
Vishaka guidelines, orders of this Court following Vishaka and the above directions, it
will be open to the aggrieved persons to approach the respective High Courts. The High
Court of such State would be in a better position to effectively consider the grievances
raised in that regard.
18. Writ petitions (including T.C.) and appeals are disposed of as above with no orders
as to costs.
© Manupatra Information Solutions Pvt. Ltd.
04-06-2025 (Page 11 of 12) www.manupatra.com NUALS Cochin
04-06-2025 (Page 12 of 12) www.manupatra.com NUALS Cochin
 MANU/SCOR/21700/2018
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal C No. 16017/2018
Date of Order: 26.07.2018
M/s Air France India Vs. Ruchika Singh Chhabra & Anr.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arun Mishra, Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. Abdul Nazeer
Counsels:
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: , M r. Neeraj Kishan Kaul, S r. , M r. K.V. Singh, , Mr.
Manish D, , Mr. Pradyuman Sewar, , Mr. Sumit R. Sharma, AOR,
For Respondents/Defendant: Mr. Siddhartha Dave,
ORDER
The matter need not be adjudicated on merits as it is fairly offered by Mr. Neeraj Kishan
Kaul, learned senior counsel that a new Committee is going to be constituted that will
inquire afresh into the matter. In the circumstances, we are not adjudicating the matter
on merits. However, question of law is kept open. The special leave petition is disposed
of accordingly.
The impugned order not to be treated as precedent for any other case.

DEEPAK MANSUKHANI Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.

Reason:
© Manupatra Information Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

04-06-2025 (Page 1 of 1) www.manupatra.com NUALS Cochin