JUDGMENT Hon’ble V.K. Shukla, J.—Dr. Vishwesh Dayal Shrivastava is before this Court for following relief; i. A writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the memorandum dated 22.2.2015 as also the office order dated 22.2.2015 both issued by the Director, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur (Annexure 14 and 15 to the writ petition). ii. A writ, order or direction of a suitable nature commanding the respondents not to take any action on the basis of the impugned orders. iii. A writ, order or direction of a suitable nature commanding the respondents not to interfere in the functioning of the petitioner as Librarian, P.K. Kelkar Library, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur and to pay the petitioner his regular monthly salary on the said post, regularly, every month. iv. A writ, order or direction in the nature of which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. v. Award cost to the humble petitioner throughout of the present writ petition. 2. The factual matrix giving rise to the instant writ petition in brief is that Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur established under the provisions of the Institutes of Technology Act 1961 and is governed by the provisions of the said Act and the statutes of Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur. The petitioner was appointed on 2.2.2009 as Librarian, P.K. Kelkar Library at Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur in PB-IV with pay-scale of Rs. 37400-67000/-. The post of Librarian is a post in the cadre of Professor. The petitioner is in continuous service since 2.2.2009. During the continuance of petitioner complaints have been made qua the behaviour of the petitioner and such complaints being complaint dated 19.9.2013 made by Pragati Indoria, undated complaint of Madhu Agnihotri and complaint dated 26.12.2014 of one Ramakant and another undated complaint of Shiv Shankar Shukla. On the said complaints being received, by an order dated 10.3.2014 a four member enquiry committee headed by one Shri N.N. Kishore as the Chairman was constituted to examine the complaints against the officials of P.K. Kelkar Library. During the course of the aforesaid proceedings petitioner was called upon to appear before the Committee, at the said juncture petitioner claims that he has requested the authorities concerned to supply copies of complaints. Petitioner submits that in response to his request, copy of complaints had been supplied to him under covering letter dated 5.5.2014. During the course of the aforesaid proceedings petitioner was called upon to appear before the Committee, at the said juncture petitioner claims that he has requested the authorities concerned to supply copies of complaints. Petitioner submits that in response to his request, copy of complaints had been supplied to him under covering letter dated 5.5.2014. Petitioner submits that after receiving the said complaints he filed a representation dated 8.5.2014 before the Chairman of the Committee and claims that he appeared before the Committee on 9.5.2014 and on the relevant date questions of general nature were put up to him and same were properly replied by him. The aforesaid Committee submitted its report on 31.7.2014 making recommendations to the effect that the Library required new leadership that adresses all the administrative issues highlighted in the committee report. The said Committee in question in reference of Pragati Indoria, the lady who has been the sufferer, made categorical mention that she during the meeting with the Committee spoke about the issues of harassment, which the Committee felt needed to be looked into by the Women Cell, and she also gave an additional written complaint and in pursuance thereof the matter was referred to the Director for appropriate action. 3. On 10.9.2014 and internal committee of the Woman Cell was constituted with Dr. Nandini Nilakantan as its Chairperson, Dr. Mini Chandran as its Vice Chairperson, Meera Jain as the External Member and Dr. Monika Katiyar, Dr. Gautam Dev, Dr. Nandini Gupta and Dr. Devopamdas as its members. The Chairperson of the Woman Cell issued a notice dated 19.10.2014 to the petitioner intimating that 10.11.2014 has been fixed as the date of first hearing pertaining to the complaint submitted by Pragati Indoria for the purpose of enquiry in terms of Section 11 of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act 2013 read with Rule 7 of the Rules framed thereunder. Petitioner submits that before the internal committee, statement of Ramakant, Brij Mohan Singh and Sunil Rana were recorded on different dates and all such statements have been recorded behind the back of petitioner. Petitioner has contended that thereafter statement of petitioner as well as statement of Suresh Singh, Bharat Lal, Darshan Singh, Dr. Anjani Bhatnagar, Archana Sachan, Uma Shankar and Umed Singh was recorded as witnesses on behalf of petitioner. Petitioner has contended that thereafter statement of petitioner as well as statement of Suresh Singh, Bharat Lal, Darshan Singh, Dr. Anjani Bhatnagar, Archana Sachan, Uma Shankar and Umed Singh was recorded as witnesses on behalf of petitioner. Petitioner has contended that during the course of the proceedings before the internal complaints committee, petitioner filed two representations dated 5.11.2014 and Pragati Indoria filed a further representation dated 26.11.2014 and also an application dated 5.12.2014 purporting to explain the reason for delay in complaint. Petitioner submits that thereafter the internal complaint committee proceeded to submit report dated 19.2.2015 recording therein that the charges of sexual harassment against the petitioner were reasonably established and the committee proceeded to recommend appropriate action against the petitioner, as per the service rules applicable to the employees of Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur. 4. Record in question further transpires that the aforesaid report was considered in the meeting of the Board of Governors held on 22.2.2015 and in the said meeting the Board of Governors has come to a provisional conclusion that the petitioner was not a fit person to be retained in service and a tentative decision was taken to impose penalty of compulsory retirement upon the petitioner in terms of statute 13 (9) (b) (b) (v) of the Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur statutes. The Board of Governors has further proceeded to authorize the Chairman of the Board of Governors to take an appropriate decision with regard to imposition of the penalty of compulsory retirement upon the petitioner, as has been provisionally decided upon by the Board of Governors. Petitioner submits that in pursuance to the decision of Board of Governors a memorandum dated 22.2.2015 has been issued by the Director placing the petitioner under suspension and calling upon the petitioner to submit his written explanation within a period of seven days from the receipt of memorandum showing cause against imposition of penalty of compulsory retirement upon the petitioner. Petitioner submits that in pursuance to the decision of Board of Governors a memorandum dated 22.2.2015 has been issued by the Director placing the petitioner under suspension and calling upon the petitioner to submit his written explanation within a period of seven days from the receipt of memorandum showing cause against imposition of penalty of compulsory retirement upon the petitioner. Petitioner has stated that the memorandum dated 22.2.2015 has been accompanied by the copies of report of the review committee headed by Shri N.N. Kishore as its Chairman as also the enquiry report of the internal complaints committee dated 19.2.2015 and alongwith the memorandum dated 22.2.2015 petitioner has also been supplied with some of the documents referred in the enquiry report and petitioner submits that he has been divested of his financial and administrative power and has been directed to deliver the charge of Librarian to the Chairman of the Senate Library Committee and has been prohibited from visiting P.K. Kelkar Library without prior permission of the Director. 5. Accepted position, in the present case, is that till today petitioner has not at all responded to the show-cause notice, that has been so issued to him, and to the contrary has been gaining time for submitting reply and in between petitioner is before this Court assailing the validity of the entire proceedings and one of the major planks of submission is that the entire action, so taken, is bad being barred by limitation under the provisions of Act of 2013. 6. Two supplementary-affidavits have also been filed. In the first supplementary-affidavit, so filed, copy of the enquiry report dated 19.2.2015 has been appended and in the second supplementary-affidavit petitioner has proceeded to bring on record evidence to substantiate this fact that pursuant to the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Vishakha and others v. State of Rajasthan, 1997 (6) SCC 241 , as per the guidelines, so provided, a complaint redressal mechanism for dealing with cases of sexual harassment stood constituted in the office of Indian Institute of Technology by office order dated 28.6.2009 and the same has been followed by other office orders dated 20.6.2012, 10.5.2013, 5.6.2013, 17.9.2013, 11.3.2014 and 25.9.2014 and it has also been sought to be contended that constitution of aforesaid grievance mechanism is in consonance with the requirement of Section 4 with regard to constitution of Internal Complaints Committee. The provision of Section 6 does not come into play with regard to Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur. Averments have also been sought to be made to the effect that at no point of time any complaint had been made by Smt. Pragati Indoria before the aforesaid committee prior to 13.10.2014 and not only this statement dated 26.11.2014 of Smt. Pragati Indoria has been brought on record. 7. On the pleadings that has come on record the parties to the dispute have proceeded to address the Court. 8. Before this Court petitioner Dr. Vishwesh Dayal Shrivastava stands represented through Shri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate, assisted by Shri Siddharth Khare, Advocate, and respondent Nos. 2 and 3 stands represented through Shri Rohan Gupta, Advocate, and most surprising feature of the present writ petition is that in spite of the fact that entire action has been initiated at the behest of Smt. Pragati Indoria who has come forward complaining sexual harassment, she has not at all been impleaded and arrayed as a party in the present writ petition. 9. Shri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate, has assailed the validity of the entire action, so taken, on following grounds; a. entire proceedings, so undertaken, are totally without jurisdiction, inasmuch as, limitation provided for under Section 9 of the Act clearly deprived and restricted the Internal Committee to proceed with the matter and, in view of this, once the complaint in question is clearly barred by limitation, then such complaint ought not to have been entertained by the Internal Committee and, as such, entire action, so undertaken, is illegal. b. even after the report in question has been submitted by the Internal Committee, then also disciplinary action is required to be undertaken as per the service rules and here no proceedings have been conducted against the petitioner under the statute 13 of the Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur statutes read with the provisions of Central Civil Service (classification, control and appeal) Rules and, in view of this, entire action, so undertaken, is bad. c. once the Board of Governors has taken a decision, then authorizing the Chairman only to take a decision is wholly unjustifiable. c. once the Board of Governors has taken a decision, then authorizing the Chairman only to take a decision is wholly unjustifiable. The arguments, that have been so advanced on behalf of petitioner, has been resisted by Shri Rohan Gupta, Advocate, by submitting; a. in the facts of the case complaint in question cannot be accepted to be barred by limitation as on the date when complaint has been made and, thereafter, additional complaint that has been so moved, the fora that has been so set-up i.e. constitution of Internal Enquiry Committee under Section 4 of the 2013 Act was not at all there and, in view of this, the complainant could not have been forced to avail a fora which was not at all available and, accordingly, rightful decision has been taken in entertaining the complaint and treating the same as being well within limitation. b. New Law is Act of 2013, prescribing period of limitation for the first time cannot extinguish right that had accrued to the “aggrieved woman” under the provisions of law, laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Vishakha (supra). c. the action that has been taken by the institution concerned is strictly on the parameters of law and petitioner should submit his reply and then after the decision is taken and if aggrieved, petitioner has a remedy of appeal before the Board of Governors and, thereafter, before the Visitor concerned. 10. c. the action that has been taken by the institution concerned is strictly on the parameters of law and petitioner should submit his reply and then after the decision is taken and if aggrieved, petitioner has a remedy of appeal before the Board of Governors and, thereafter, before the Visitor concerned. 10. Before we proceed to consider the respective arguments, it would be relevant to note that sexual harassment and right to work with dignity to women is a universally recognized social human right and as there were repeated violation of such human right and there has been no law holding the field the Apex Court in the case of Vishakha (Supra) proceeded to frame guidelines for enforcement of said rights of a working women and in the said direction keeping in view the definition of human rights under Section 2 (d) of the Protection of Human Rights Act 1993 gave the guidelines and the said guidelines and norms, prescribed therein, 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: 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 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 non-verbal conduct of sexual nature. 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 non-verbal conduct of sexual nature. Where any of these acts is committed in circumstances where under 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 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. 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 mis-conduct 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 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 member should be women. Further, to prevent the possibility of any under 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 suitable manner. 10. 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 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.” 11. The said guidelines and norms once again has been subject-matter of notice of Apex Court in the case of Medha Kotwal Lele v. Union of India and others, 2012 (9) SCR 895, and once again Apex Court insisted for strict enforcement of the aforementioned guidelines in question. 12. On account of directives of Apex Court at various levels redressal mechanism had been created and then Parliamentary Enactment known as the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act 2013 has been enforced for providing protection against sexual harassment of women at work place and redressal of complaints and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. 13. Sub-section 3 of Section 1 proceeds to mention that this particular Act shall come into force on such date as the Central Government may, by notification in the Offical Gazette and the Central Government in its turn has proceeded to notify the said date in question in Official Gazette as 9 December 2013, as such, this is accepted position that the said Act in question i.e. Act No. 14 of 2013 has been in operation since 9 December 2013. 14. 14. In order to answer the issues, that have been so raised, relevant provisions of the aforementioned Act is being looked into; “Chapter I Preliminary 2. In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires, — (a) “aggrieved woman” means- (i) in relation to a workplace, a woman, of any age whether employed or not, who alleges to have been subjected to any act of sexual harassment by the respondent; (ii) in relation to a dwelling place or house, a woman of any age who is employed in such a dwelling place or house; (b)............... (c) ............... (d) ................ (e) ................. (f)”employee” means a person employed at a workplace for any work on regular, temporary, ad hoc or daily wage basis, either directly or through an agent, including a contractor, with or, without the knowledge of the principal employer, whether. For remuneration or not, or working on a voluntary basis or otherwise, whether the terms of employment are express or implied and includes a co-worker, a contract worker, probationer, trainee, apprentice or called by any other such name; (g) ................ (h) “Internal Committee” means an Internal Complaints Committee constituted under Section 4; (I) “Local Committee’’ means the Local Complaints Committee constituted under Section 6; (j) .............. (k) ............... (l) ............... (m) ............. (n) “sexual harassment” includes any one or more of the following unwelcome acts or behaviour (whether directly or by implication) namely : (i) physical contact and advances; or (ii) a demand or request for sexual favours; or (iii) making sexually coloured remarks; or (iv) showing pornography; or (v) any other unwelcome physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct of sexual nature; (o) “workplace” includes • (i) any department, organisation, undertaking, establishment, enterprise, institution, office, branch or unit which is established, owned, controlled or wholly or substantially financed by funds provided directly or indirectly by the appropriate Government or the local authority or a Government company or a corporation or a co-operative society; 3. (1) No woman shall be subjected to sexual harassment at any workplace. (1) No woman shall be subjected to sexual harassment at any workplace. (2) The following circumstances, among other circumstances, if it occurs or is present in relation to or connected with any act or behaviour of sexual harassment may amount to sexual harassment : (i) implied or explicit promise of preferential treatment in her employment: or (ii) implied or explicit threat of detrimental treatment in her employment; or (iii) implied or explicit threat about her present or future employment status: or (iv) interference with her work or creating an intimidating or offensive or hostile work environment for her; or (v) humiliating treatment likely to affect her health or safety. CHAPTER II Constitution of Internal Complaints Committee 4. (1)Every employer of a workplace shall, by an order in writing, constitute a Committee to be known as the “Internal Complaints Committee”: Provided that where the offices or administrative units of the workplace arc located at different places or divisional or sub-divisional level, the Internal Committee shall be constituted at all administrative units or offices. (2) The Internal Committee shall consist of the following members to be nominated by the employer namely: (a) a Presiding Officer who shall be a woman employed at a senior level at workplace from amongst the employees: Provided that in case a senior level woman employee is not available, the Presiding Officer shall be nominated from other offices or administrative units of the workplace referred to in sub-section (1): Provided further that in case the other offices or administrative units of the workplace do not have a senior level woman employee, the Presiding Officer shall be nominated from any other workplace of the same employer or other department or organisation; (b) not less than two Members from amongst employees preferably committed to the cause of women or who have had experience in social work or have legal knowledge; (c) one member from amongst non-Governmental organisations or associations committed to the cause of women or a person familiar with the issues relating to sexual harassment: Provided that at least one-half of the total Members so nominated shall be women. (3) The Presiding Officer and every Member of the Internal Committee shall hold office tor such period, not exceeding three years, from the date of their nomination as may he specified by the employer. (3) The Presiding Officer and every Member of the Internal Committee shall hold office tor such period, not exceeding three years, from the date of their nomination as may he specified by the employer. (4) The Member appointed from amongst the non-Governmental organisations or associations shall be paid such fees or allowances for holding the proceedings of the Internal Committee, by the employer, as may be prescribed. (5) Where the Presiding Officer or any Member of the internal Committee, (a) contravenes the provisions of Section 16; or (b) has been convicted for an offence or an inquiry into an offence under any law for the time being in force is pending against him: or (c) he has been found guilty in any disciplinary proceedings or a disciplinary proceeding is pending against him; or (d) has so abused his position as to render his continuance in office prejudicial to the public interest, such Presiding Officer or Member, as the case may be, shall be removed from the Committee and the vacancy so created or any casual vacancy shall he filled by fresh nomination in accordance with the provisions of this section. Chapter III Constitution of Local Complaints Committee 6.(1) Every District Officer shall constitute in the district concerned, a committee to be known as the “Local Complaints Committee” to receive complaints of sexual harassment from establishments where the Internal Complaints Committee has not been constituted due to having less than ten workers or if the complaint is •against the employer himself. (2) The District Officer shall designate one nodal officer in every block, taluka and tehsil in rural or tribal area and ward or municipality in the urban area, to receive complaints and forward the same to the concerned Local Complaints Committee within a period of seven days. (3) The jurisdiction of the Local Complaints Committee shall extend to the areas of the district where it is constituted. 7. (3) The jurisdiction of the Local Complaints Committee shall extend to the areas of the district where it is constituted. 7. (I) The Local Complaints Committee shall consist of the following members to be nominated by the District Officer, namely : (a) a Chairperson to be nominated from amongst the eminent women in the field of social work and committed to the cause of women; (b) one Member to be nominated from amongst the women working in block, taluka or tehsil or ward or municipality in the district; (c) two Members, of whom at least one shall be a woman, to be nominated from amongst such non-Governmental organisations or associations committed to the cause of women or a person familiar with the issues relating to sexual harassment, which may be prescribed: Provided that at least one of the nominees should, preferably, have a background in law or legal knowledge: Provided further that at least one oft he nominees shall be a woman belonging to the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes or the Other Backward Classes or minority community notified by the Central Government, from time to time; (d) the concerned officer dealing with the social welfare or women and child development in the district, shall he a member ex officio. Chapter IV Complaint 9. (1) Any aggrieved woman may make, in writing, a complaint of sexual harassment at workplace to the Internal Committee if so constituted, or the Local Committee, in case it is not so constituted, within a period of three months from the date of incident and in case of a series of incidents, within a period of three months from the date of last incident: Provided that where such complaint cannot be made_in writing, the Presiding Officer or any Member of the Internal Committee or the Chairperson or any Member of the Local Committee, as the case may be, shall render all reasonable assistance to the woman for making the complaint in writing: Provided further that the Internal Committee or, as the case may be, the Local Committee may, for the reasons to be recorded in writing, extend the time limit not exceeding three months, if it is satisfied that the circumstances were such which prevented the woman from filing a complaint within the said period. (2) Where the aggrieved woman is unable to make a complaint on account of her physical or mental incapacity or death or otherwise, her legal heir or such other person as may be prescribed may make a complaint under this section. 10. ............... 11. (I) Subject to the provisions of Section 10, the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, shall, where the respondent is an employee, proceed to make inquiry into the complaint in accordance with the provisions of the service rules applicable to the respondent and where no such rules exist, in such manner as may be prescribed or in case of a domestic worker, the Local Committee shall, if prima facie case exist, forward the complaint to the police, within a period of seven days for registering the case under Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code, and any other relevant provisions of the said Code where applicable: Provided that where the aggrieved woman informs the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, that any term or condition of the settlement arrived at under sub-section (2) of Section 10 has not been complied with by the respondent, the Internal Committee or the Local Committee shall proceed to make an inquiry into the complaint or, as the case may be, forward the complaint to the police: Provided further that where both the parties are employees, the parties shall, during the course of inquiry, be given an opportunity of being heard and a copy of the findings shall be made available to both the parties enabling them to make representation against the findings before the Committee. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code, the Court may, when the respondent is convicted of the offence, order payment of such sums as it may consider appropriate, to the aggrieved woman by the respondent, having regard to the provisions of Section 15. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code, the Court may, when the respondent is convicted of the offence, order payment of such sums as it may consider appropriate, to the aggrieved woman by the respondent, having regard to the provisions of Section 15. (3) For the purpose of making an inquiry under sub-section (1), the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, shall have the same powers as are vested in a Civil Court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 when trying a suit in respect of the following matters, namely : (a) summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person and examining him on oath; (b) requiring the discovery and production of documents; and (c) any other matter which may be prescribed. (4) The inquiry under sub-section (1) shall be completed within a period of ninety days. Chapter V Inquiry into Complaint 12. (1) During the pendency of an inquiry. on a written request made by the aggrieved woman, the Internal Committee or the Local Committee. as the case may be, may recommend to the employer to (a) transfer the aggrieved woman or the respondent to any other workplace; or (b) grant leave to the aggrieved woman up to a period of three months: or (c) grant such other relief to the aggrieved woman as may be prescribed. (2) The leave granted to the aggrieved woman under this section shall be in addition to the leave she would be otherwise entitled. (3) On the recommendation of the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, under sub-section (1), the employer shall implement the recommendations made under sub-section (1) and send the report of such implementation to the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be. 13. (1) On the completion of an inquiry under this Act, the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, shall provide a report of its findings to the employer, or as the case may be, the District Officer with in a period of ten days from the date of completion of the inquiry and such report be made available to the concerned parties. (2) Where the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, arrives at the conclusion that the allegation against the respondent has not been proved, it shall recommend to the employer and the District Officer that no action is required to he taken in the matter. (3) Where the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, arrives at the conclusion that the allegation against the respondent has been proved, it shall recommend to the employer or the District Officer, as the case may be- (i) to take action for sexual harassment as a misconduct in accordance with the provisions of the service rules applicable to the respondent or where no such service rules have been made, in such manner as may be prescribed; (ii) to deduct, notwithstanding the service rules applicable to the respondent, from the salary or wages of the respondent such sum as it may consider appropriate to be paid to the aggrieved woman or to her legal heirs, as it may determine, in accordance with the provisions of Section 15: Provided that in case the employer is unable to make such deduction from the salary of the respondent due to his being absent from duty or cessation of employment it may direct to the respondent to pay such sum to the aggrieved woman: Provided further that in case the respondent fails to pay the sum referred to in clause (ii), the Internal Committee or, as the case may be, the Local Committee may forward the order for recovery of the sum as an arrear of land revenue to the concerned District Officer. (4) The employer or the District Officer shall act upon the recommendation within sixty days of its receipt by him. 14. (1) Where the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, arrives at a conclusion that the allegation against the respondent is malicious or the aggrieved woman or any other person making the complaint has made the complaint knowing it to be false or the aggrieved woman or any other person making the complaint has produced any forged or misleading document. it may recommend to the employer or the District Officer. it may recommend to the employer or the District Officer. As the case may be, to take action against the woman or the person who has made the complaint under sub-section (1)or sub-section (2) of Section 9, as the case may be, in accordance with the provisions of the service rules applicable to her or him or where no such service rules exist, in such manner as may be prescribed: Provided that a mere inability to substantiate a complaint or provide adequate proof need not attract action against the complainant under this section: Provided further that the malicious intent on part of the complainant shall be established after an inquiry in accordance with the procedure prescribed, before any action is recommended. (2) Where the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, arrives at a conclusion that during the inquiry any witness has given false evidence or produced any forged or misleading document, it may recommend to the employer of the. witness or the District Officer, as the case may be, to take action in accordance with the provisions of the service rules applicable to the said witness or where no such service rules exist, in such manner as may be prescribed. 15. .............. 16. .............. 17. .............. 18. (1) Any person aggrieved from the recommendations made under sub-section (2) of Section 13 or under clause (i) or clause (ii) of sub-section (3) of Section 13 or sub-section (I) or sub-section (2) of Section 14 or Section 17 or non-implementation of such recommendations may prefer an appeal to the Court or tribunal in accordance with the provisions of the service rules applicable to the said person or where no such service rules exist then, without prejudice to provisions contained in any other law for the time being in force, the person aggrieved may prefer an appeal in such manner as may he prescribed. (2) The appeal under sub-section (1) shall be preferred within a period of ninety days of the recommendations” 15. (2) The appeal under sub-section (1) shall be preferred within a period of ninety days of the recommendations” 15. After 9 December 2013, the statutory provision in the matter of sexual harassment of a women at work place is governed under the provisions of Act No. 14 of 2013 and as per the said Act every employer of a workplace has to by an order in writing constitute a Committee to be known as the Internal Complaints Committee and similarly every District Officer is obligated in the district concerned to constitute Local Complaints Committee to receive complaints of sexual harassment from establishments where the Internal Complaints Committee has not been constituted due to having less than ten workers or if the complaint is against the employer himself. 16. Act No. 14 of 2013 is a remedial statute in the direction of providing platform to working woman, who have been victim of sexual harassment at their respective work place. Forum of complaint has been provided for and an aggrieved women has been given right to make complaint in writing of sexual harassment at work place to the Internal Committee within a period of three months from the date of incident and in case of series of incidents, within a period of three months from the date of last incident. A proviso has been added to the said section mentioning therein where such complaint cannot be made in writing, the Presiding Officer or any Member of the Internal Committee of the Chairperson or any Member of the Local Committee, as the case may be, is obligated to render all reasonable assistance to the woman for making the complaint in writing. The second proviso proceeds to mention that the Internal Committee or, as the case may be, the Local Committee, for the reasons to be recorded in writing, extend the time limit not exceeding three months, if it is satisfied that the circumstances were such which prevented the woman from filing a complaint within the said period. Thus under the scheme of things, provided for, alongwith forum, limitation has been provided for making complaint by aggrieved woman and in addition to it the forum has been conferred with the authority to extend the time limit of filing complaint not exceeding three months. Thus under the scheme of things, provided for, alongwith forum, limitation has been provided for making complaint by aggrieved woman and in addition to it the forum has been conferred with the authority to extend the time limit of filing complaint not exceeding three months. Statutes of limitation have always been regarded as procedural, for the reason that object of statute of limitation is not to create any right but to prescribe periods within which legal proceedings may be instituted for enforcement of rights which exist under law. 17. Suggestion has been made that if an “aggrieved woman” is prevented from filing complaint due to any reason; other than physical or mental incapacity, the procedure prescribed under Sub-section 2 of Section 9 of the Act of 2013, can be resorted to as it in itself does not prescribe any limitation, and in the facts of the case, once sexual harassment has been substantiated, then the plea that proceedings are barred by limitation should be brushed aside. 18. Sub-section 2 of Section 9 deals with the situation where aggrieved woman is unable to make a complaint on account of her physical or mental incapacity or death or otherwise, then her legal heir or such other person as may be prescribed may make a complaint under said section. In instituting complaint under Sub-section 2 of Section 9 no limitation has been provided for and the reason appears to be obvious that the aggrieved woman herself is unable to make complaint on account of her physical or mental incapacity or death or otherwise and then her legal heir or such other person as may be prescribed are free to make a complaint on her behalf. Sub-section (1) of Section 9 contemplates that an aggrieved woman when she has to make a complaint, then she has to comply with the law of limitation, as has been provided under Sub-section 1 of Section 9 and Internal Committee has an authority to extend the period of limitation but in complaints made under Sub-section 2 of Section 9 by legal heir or such other person, no such limitation has been provided for but legal heir and such other person making complaint will have to substantiate this fact that aggrieved woman is unable to make complaint on account of her physical or mental incapacity or death or otherwise. 19. 19. The word ‘otherwise’ has been suggested to be construed broadly and for this purpose reliance is being placed on Rule 6 (iii) of the Rules 2013, which provides that where the aggrieved woman for any other reason is unable to make a complaint, a complaint may be filed by any other person who has the knowledge of the incident with her written consent. “Otherwise” has been sought to be linked with “for any other reason” and based on the same suggestion is that term “otherwise” is wide enough to include any reason other than physical or mental capacity or death. Word “otherwise” is in the company of words physical or mental incapacity or death and in this background the word “otherwise” under Sub-section 2 of Section 9 has to be read as ejusdem generis and would cover such situations that could be grouped with the words “mental” or “physical” incapacity or “death”. Apex Court in the case of Kamlesh Kumar Sharma v. Yogesh Kumar Gupta, 1998 (3) SCC 45 , has considered the scope and ambit of the use of word “otherwise” and clearly ruled that word “otherwise” has to be read as ejusdem generis that is to say in group similar to death, resignation, long leave vacancy, invalidation, person not joining after being selected. “Otherwise” would take its colour from its associated words, and otherwise here would cover all other situations, where the aggrieved woman is not in a position to make complaint herself and the complaint has to be filled through any other person. “Otherwise” as it has been suggested to be read and understood, would defeat the provision of limitation that has been provided under Sub-section 1 of Section 9 of the Act of 2013. “For any other reason” in the context of “otherwise” would cover such situation wherein it is practically impossible for the aggrieved woman to make complaint. Sub-section 1 of Section 9 gives forum to an aggrieved woman whereas Sub-section 2 of Section 9 gives forum to the legal heir or such other person as may be prescribed for making complaint where the aggrieved woman is unable to make complaint due to her physical or mental incapacity or death or otherwise. Sub-section 1 of Section 9 gives forum to an aggrieved woman whereas Sub-section 2 of Section 9 gives forum to the legal heir or such other person as may be prescribed for making complaint where the aggrieved woman is unable to make complaint due to her physical or mental incapacity or death or otherwise. Legislature consciously at one place has provided for limitation and in the other contingency when the case is to be espoused by others, in given set of situations, no limitation has been provided for. 20. Here the applicability of Sub-section 1 of Section 9 cannot be disputed as admittedly aggrieved woman has come forward making complaint of sexual harassment, and the issue is as to whether the said complaint in question should have been treated as barred by limitation or not, in the facts of present case. 21. On the parameters of Sub-section 1 of Section 9 it is being asserted before this Court that the Act in question has been enforced w.e.f. 9.12.2013 and, in the present case, the complaint in question has been moved on 19.5.2014 and the statement of lady also demonstrates that complaint is time barred as date of incidents has been described therein then in view of the provisions of Sub-section 1 of Section 9 of the Act the complaint in question was time barred on the face of it and the said complaint should not have been entertained and in a mechanical manner delay ought not to have been condoned, as has been done in the present case. 22. This particular stand of the petitioner has been sought to be resisted by submitting that at Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur the forum for redressal of complaint pertaining to sexual harassment had been created on 10.9.2014 in consonance with the provisions as contained under Section 4 of the Act concerned and once the forum itself was not at all there and it has come in existence on 10.9.2014 then on the plea of limitation, in the facts of case, proceedings cannot be said to be vitiated in law and especially in the backdrop that the lady had been pursuing the matter before the authorities even before enforcement of the Act in question. 23. 23. With these arguments, coming forward, what we find from the record is that in the present case on 19.9.2013 Pragati Indoria had made a complaint mentioning therein that her future was not at all safe in library and she was requesting for her transfer. This much is accepted position that enquiry committee has been constituted vide office order dated 10.3.2014 to examine the complaint received against the official of P.K. Kelkar Library at Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur and in reference of Smt. Pragati Indoria it was mentioned that during her meeting with the committee she spoke about her harassment which the committee felt needed to be looked into by the Woman Cell and this fact also takes note of the fact that Mrs. Indoria has made an additional complaint in this regard and the matter was referred to the Director for appropriate action. 24. The additional written complaint in question was written on 19.5.2014 is the complaint on which action has been taken by the Internal Committee and the issue is whether in the facts of the case it could be said that complaint in question is barred by limitation under the provisions of Act of 2013. What we find, in the present case, is that Pragati Indoria has been complaining right from 19.9.2013 in a veiled manner and she clearly proceeded to mention that her future is not at all safe in library and requested for her transfer. The said application in question was forwarded to Librarian on the same date i.e. 19.9.2013 and the said application had been with the Librarian and ultimately on 7.1.2014 recommendation has been made for immediate transfer. This much is also clear that a committee had been constituted on 10.3.2014 to examine the complaints made by Staff Members, the Committee met more than 12 times and before the said Committee she stated the nature of her harassment and victimization and before the said committee, who was looking after her complaint, additional complaint dated 19.5.2014 has been filed, wherein each and every specific details of her harassment and victimization, which earlier was a latent one under complaint dated 19.9.2013 same become patent. The Committee has made note of the fact in its report dated 31.7.2014 that Mrs. Pragati Indoria during her meeting with the Committee spoke about the issues of harassment. The Committee has made note of the fact in its report dated 31.7.2014 that Mrs. Pragati Indoria during her meeting with the Committee spoke about the issues of harassment. This fact is accepted that Internal Committee has been constituted on the parameters of Section 4 of the Act in question on 19.10.2014 and prior to it there was no Internal Committee constituted but there existed Woman Cell as per the guidelines of the Apex Court in the case of Vishakha (supra). The complaint of Smt. Pragati Indoria was already there prior to the enforcement of the Act in question and in reference of the said complaint when enquiry was conducted she came out with the specifications of harassment and details of victimization meted to her and, thereafter, she filed additional complaint on 19.5.2014, then in the circumstances to counted that Smt. Pragati Indoria had not come forward with the complaint within the period of limitation, cannot be accepted by this Court, and the request for ignoring the complaint based on limitation has to be politely turned down. 25. Even otherwise under the old system that existed prior to 9.12.2013 there has been no limitation provided for entertaining the complaint in question i.e. approaching the Woman Cell and the Act of 2013 prescribed the period of limitation for the first time, same cannot by itself divest the aggrieved woman of her vested right of action accrued in her favour under the old system. New law of limitation providing for specified time to file complaint within three months from the date of last incident cannot extinguish a vested right of action in the facts of present case. Here prior to enforcement of Act of 2013 petitioner has made a complaint and cognizance has also been taken on the same and even after the enforcement of the Act i.e. after 9.12.2013 the mechanism that was there on the spot proceeded to enquire into the complaint of Smt. Pragati Indoria, she before the said committee made her statement and also filed additional complaint dated 19.5.2014, in view of this, in the facts of case, complaint in question could not have been thrown away by treating the same as time barred. 26. 26. Even otherwise Smt. Pragati Indoria cannot be asked to perform an impossible task, inasmuch as, the Internal Committee to be constituted in terms of Section 4 of the 2013 Act came to be constituted on 10.9.2014 and once her complaint was already there then to say that complaint in question was barred by limitation cannot be accepted, in the facts of case. The situation that emerges in the present case is that Act of 2013 had come into force but the forum that has been provided for to redress the grievances of aggrieved woman has not at all been provided for, in such a situation, until the forum is constituted no proceeding can be taken in the manner prescribed by the statute. The inevitable conclusion would be that for computing limitation provided for under Sub-section 1 of Section 9, the period starting w.e.f. 9.12.2013 to the date when forum has been constituted, will have to be ignored, and limitation will have to be computed, accordingly, keeping in view the date of last incident and giving authority to Internal Committee to condone the delay. Any other view would defeat the purpose of the remedial Act i.e. to provide protection against sexual harassment of woman at workplace and for the prevention and redressal of complaints. 27. Submission has been made that absence of fora would not extend the limitation as in the present case the forum that has been provided w.e.f. 10.9.2014 was already in existence but with larger participation and from amongst those larger participants a smaller body has been created and, as such, such a plea should be turned down. 28. The earlier fora, that has been so created, has been based on the guidelines given by the Apex Court in the case of Visakha (Supra) and it was a larger body but after the enforcement of statutory provisions, the statutory body that is to deal with the complaints has to be on the parameters of Section 4 of the Act in question. The language of Sub-section 2 of Section 4 mandates that Internal Committee shall consist of the following members. The members who are to be there has been clearly provided in clause (a) to (c) of Sub-section 2 of Section 4. The language of Sub-section 2 of Section 4 mandates that Internal Committee shall consist of the following members. The members who are to be there has been clearly provided in clause (a) to (c) of Sub-section 2 of Section 4. Apart from the members specified by statute, no one else can be a member of Internal Committee and, in view of this, the Woman Cell constituted on the guidelines of Visakha (supra) cannot be treated as a substitute of Internal Committee constituted under Section 4 of the Act, as has been sought to be suggested before this Court. Absence of statutory fora on the spot, certainly would have an impact on limitation, as has already been discussed by us in the preceding part of judgment. 29. Suggestion has also been made that aggrieved woman could have approached the Local Complaints Committee constituted in term of Section 6 of Act of 2013. Institute in question has come up with the specific case that at no point of time “Local Complaints Committee” in term of Section 6 had been constituted at district level. From the side of petitioner, through his counsel, copy of Government Order dated 20.3.2001 and copy of orders dated 30.4.2010 and 26.3.2015 issued by District Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar, has been produced, wherein District Magistrate makes a mention that pursuant to the directives in Government Order dated 20.3.2001 Complaints Committee has been constituted. Letter of District Magistrate dated 30.4.2010 shows constitution of Complaints Committee with one Chairman and two Members. Said constitution of Complaints Committee has been as per the directives of Apex Court in the case of Visakha (supra) and the letter of District Magistrate dated 26.3.2015 does reflect that in consonance with Section 6 of the Act of 2013, Complaints Committee has been constituted, as its constitution reflects one Chairman with four Members. Thus from the own records supplied by the petitioner before this Court, it is clear that in district Kanpur Nagar, “Complaints Committee” under Section 6 of the Act of 2013 came to be constituted for the first time on 26.3.2015. 30. Moreover, in the present case, we would certainly note the contents of application dated 5.11.2014 wherein Mrs. Thus from the own records supplied by the petitioner before this Court, it is clear that in district Kanpur Nagar, “Complaints Committee” under Section 6 of the Act of 2013 came to be constituted for the first time on 26.3.2015. 30. Moreover, in the present case, we would certainly note the contents of application dated 5.11.2014 wherein Mrs. Pragati Indoria has clearly mentioned that due to shame and hesitation she did not make complaint, and moreover she was a contractual employee and she came to be confirmed in February 2012, and she was constantly harassed and victimized by different means and modes, then she moved an application for transfer in September 2013 and she was transferred in January 2014 and then when on her complaint enquiry was made by Committee she narrated her woes of harassment and victimization. This application in question has been allowed on the premises that complaint was barred by limitation, whereas, as mentioned by us earlier, the complaint was not at all barred by limitation. 31. Once we have proceeded to hold that the complaint in question is not time barred and we find that Internal Committee has proceeded to make enquiries and, thereafter, made recommendations under the scheme of things provided for, and against the recommendations, so made on 19.2.2015, in case there is any other infirmity other than the issue of limitation, then there is an appellate forum provided for and before us nothing has been pointed out as to why petitioner would not at all avail the aforementioned remedy as against the finding returned on merits. It is, accordingly, always open to the petitioner to avail alternative statutory forum that has been so provided for under Section 18 of the Act of 2013. 32. Petitioner’s much emphasis has been on the fact that provisions of service rules have not at all been complied with and fair opportunity has not at all been provided to him. 33. In case petitioner’s grievance before this Court is that fair opportunity has not been provided to him he can always raise his objections pursuant to the show-cause notice giving therein the instances causing prejudice, hence requiring fresh enquiry on the complaint, so made. All these aspect of the matter can be very well be pointed by the petitioner before the Chairman of Board of Governors, who has been authorized to consider the reply, so submitted. All these aspect of the matter can be very well be pointed by the petitioner before the Chairman of Board of Governors, who has been authorized to consider the reply, so submitted. The Board of Governors under Section 13 (3) of Institute of Technologies Act 1961 is empowered to appoint committees to discharge the functions of Board of Governors. Accordingly, once decision has been taken by Board of Governors authorizing Chairman to take action, then there is no infirmity in the same as Chairman is fully competent to take decision. Here show-cause notice has been issued to petitioner but instead of replying to the same he has been buying time on the spot and whatever pleas are being raised by him before this Court, same should be submitted by him in his reply and it is always expected that the issues raised by petitioner would be objectively considered by the authority concerned by means of reasoned and speaking order. 34. In view of this, as show-cause notice has been issued, the petitioner should file his response to the same so that final decision can be taken in the matter, in accordance with law, as such, writ petition, as it has been framed and drawn, is dismissed, accordingly. ———————