Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 263 (MAD)

Muthu Selvi v. Director of Elementary Education

2025-01-09

B.PUGALENDHI

body2025
ORDER : 1. The petitioners are working as Headmistresses in the primary schools and they have made certain allegations against the 6 th respondent / Block Educational Officer that he has sexually harassed them. Apart from these petitioners, another Headmistress of Nagakonaanoor namely Radharani has also lodged a similar complaint against the 6 th respondent. All these complaints were referred to the Internal Complaints Committee constituted under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 [herein after shall be referred as 'the Act']. The internal complaints committee [herein after shall be referred to as 'the committee'] has submitted its report dated 25.05.2022 that the complainants have not substantiated their complaints with documents and that the complainants have participated in the family function conducted by the 6 th respondent. Challenging the said report this writ petition is filed. 2. The learned Counsel for the petitioners by referring to the report of the committee submits that the procedure as contemplated under Section 11 of the Act and the procedures as contemplated under Rule 7 of the the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Rules, 2013 [herein after shall be referred as 'the Rules'] have not been followed by the committee while enquiring into the complaint and the same has not been reflected in the impugned report. 3. The learned Counsel by referring to the second proviso to Section 11 of the Act submits that if the committee comes to the conclusion that the complaint has not been proved, copy of the findings should be provided to the parties enabling to them to make representations as against the findings before the committee. This according to the learned Counsel for the petitioners is to ensure the principle of natural justice and the same has not been complied in this case. The committee is also expected to conduct enquiry by following the principle of natural justice as prescribed under Rule 7 of the Rules. 4. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the official respondent and the learned Counsel for the 6 th respondent submits that the committee has been constituted as contemplated under the Act and there is no violation in constituting the committee. The committee has provided reasonable opportunity. 4. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the official respondent and the learned Counsel for the 6 th respondent submits that the committee has been constituted as contemplated under the Act and there is no violation in constituting the committee. The committee has provided reasonable opportunity. If the petitioners are aggrieved by the report of the committee under Section 13(2) of the Act, they are having appeal remedy before the Director of Elementary Education, DPI Compound, Nungambakkam, Chennai, who has been notified as the Appellate Authority, as per Rule 11 of the Rules. He further submits that the committee has come to the conclusion that these petitioners have participated in the family function of the 6 th respondent subsequent to their complaints. 5. This Court has considered the rival submissions made and perused the materials placed on record. 6. The petitioners are Headmistresses in the primary schools. They have lodged complaints as against the 6 th respondent / Block Development Officer that he has sexually harassed them. Apart from these petitioners, one Headmistress Radharani has also lodged a similar complaint as against the 6 th respondent. All these complaints have been referred to the internal complaints committee and the committee has enquired and came to the conclusion that the complainants have not established their case as against the 6 th respondent. This report should be treated as a report under Section 13(2) of the Act. The committee has reported that the complainants have not established their case by producing documents, messages, videos, etc., and they have also participated in the family function of the 6 th respondent after the sexual harassment advanced by the 6 th respondent. 7. This Court perused the report of the committee. The 1 st petitioner M.Muthu Selvi has lodged the complaint as against the 6 th respondent that the 6 th respondent has harassed her from July 2019. The 2 nd petitioner R.Santhi has lodged the complaint that during the Covid-19 period in the year 2021 the 6 th respondent has sexually harassed her. The petitioners have not stated anything in their complaint that the 6 th respondent has communicated any messages and they are having any documents for his sexual harassment. However, one Radharani, another Headmistress in her complaint has stated that he has harassed her from the year 2019 and he has also sent messages, and obscene films to her mobile phone. The petitioners have not stated anything in their complaint that the 6 th respondent has communicated any messages and they are having any documents for his sexual harassment. However, one Radharani, another Headmistress in her complaint has stated that he has harassed her from the year 2019 and he has also sent messages, and obscene films to her mobile phone. The said Radharani has not challenged this report of the committee. It is reported the said Radharani went on voluntary retirement, which according to the learned Counsel for the petitioner is due to the conduct of the 6 th respondent. 8. Section 18(2) of the Act provides for an appeal remedy as against the report filed under Section 13(2) of the Act. The petitioner can prefer an appeal before the Officer, who is notified as the appellate authority under Rule 11 of the Rules. The learned Special Government Pleader submits that the Director of Elementary Education has been notified as the appellate authority as per Rule 11 of the Rules. Though these petitioners are having an appeal remedy, the petitioners have made out a case that the internal complaint committee has not submitted its findings to them as contemplated under second proviso to Section 11 (1) of the Act. The procedures for enquiry on the complaint are prescribed under Section 11 of the Act, which reads as under: “ 11. Inquiry into complaint. The procedures for enquiry on the complaint are prescribed under Section 11 of the Act, which reads as under: “ 11. Inquiry into complaint. (1) 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 (45 of 1860), 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 (45 of 1860), 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 the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 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; (c) any other matter which may be prescribed. (4) The inquiry under sub-section (1) shall be completed within a period of ninety days. 9. Proviso 2 to Section 11(1) mandates the committee to furnish the copy of the findings to both parties enabling them to make representation as against the findings before the committee. It appears that the proviso 2 to Section 11(1) has not been complied with by the committee. The committee has concluded that the complainants have not substantiated their case with documents and other materials and they have participated in the family function of the 6 th respondent. Not even the date of the said function has been mentioned in the report. It is not known as to how the committee has come to the conclusion that the petitioners have participated in the family function of the 6 th respondent. 10. Since the report is vague and without complying with the procedures as contemplated in proviso 2 to Section 11(1) of the Act, this Court is inclined to interfere with the report of the internal complaints committee and accordingly, the impugned report is set aside. The matter is remanded to the internal complaints committee for fresh consideration. 11. The writ petition is allowed in the above. Terms. No costs. 12. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed.