Dr. Sitansu Sekhar Jena vs Union Of India And Ors
2015 Latest Caselaw 986 Del

*            IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                          W.P.(C) 4298/2014
%                                                     3rd February, 2015

DR. SITANSU SEKHAR JENA                                      ..... Petitioner
                           Through        Ms. Jyoti Singh, Sr. Adv.,
                                          Ms. Tinu Bajwa, Adv. &
                                          Mr. Sameer Sharma, Adv.
                           versus

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS                                ..... Respondent

Through Mr. Sanjay Jain, ASG, Mr. Bhagwan Swarup Shukla, CGSC Ms. Shreya Sinha, Adv. for R-1&4 Mr. Pramod Gupta, Adv. with Ms. Yogyata Verma, Adv. & Ms. Priyanka Ghosh, Adv. for R-2

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA

To be referred to the Reporter or not?

VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)

1. This writ petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of

India was filed by the petitioner impugning the Office Memorandum dated

11.03.2014 and the subsequent proceedings conducted thereupon by the

Sexual Harassment Committee of the respondent no. 3. The Sexual

Harassment Committee was constituted pursuant to the complaints of the

respondent no. 2 in this writ petition.

2. There is an earlier judgment dated 26.11.2013 passed by this Court in

W.P.(C) No. 7853/2011 titled as Anita Priyadarshini Vs. UOI & Ors. as per

which judgment two aspects were decided viz entitlement of technical

resignation of the petitioner in that case and respondent no. 2 herein, from

the respondent no. 3 herein, and, the decision on the stand of the new

employer - the respondent no.3 in the earlier case viz IGNOU in denying the

appointment to the respondent no. 2 herein with IGNOU.

3. In terms of the judgment dated 26.11.2013 in W.P.(C) No. 7853/2011

the respondent no. 2 herein, and who was the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.

7853/2011, gave her representation with the respondent no. 3 herein/NIOS

by withdrawing the allegations made against the petitioner herein and

seeking technical resignation. The facts and events prior to 26.11.2013 thus

merged in the judgment dated 26.11.2013 and the consequent representation

made by respondent no. 2 herein to the respondent no. 3 herein seeking

technical resignation after withdrawing of allegations made against the

present petitioner.

4. The respondent no. 2 has however alleged in the complaint

subsequently made to the Sexual Harassment Committee that there are

factual events constituting sexual harassment which have happened after

passing of the earlier judgment on 26.11.2013, though, the complaint made

by the respondent no. 2 herein before the Sexual Harassment Committee

also mentions about factual aspects occurring prior to 26.11.2013. The

petitioner herein had in this petition questioned the issue of the Office

Memorandum dated 11.03.2014, and which was pursuant to the detailed

complaint of the respondent no. 2 herein dated 12.06.2014, on the ground

that all issues with respect to factual aspects prior to 26.11.2013 stood

withdrawn by the respondent no. 2 herein and therefore the Sexual

Harassment Committee could not go into such complaint with respect to the

factual averments prior to 26.11.2013.

5. In view of the interim orders passed by this Court, and which were

passed in view of the stand of the Union of India and the

employer/respondent no.3 that the requirement is of the Committee to decide

the complaint in a 90 days period, this court allowed proceedings of the

Sexual Harassment Committee to continue, but it was directed that the report

of the committee could only be given in a sealed cover to this court.

6. The Sexual Harassment Committee has now given its report dated

26/29.09.2014. This report in a sealed cover has been brought in this Court,

and the sealed cover after the consent of the parties was opened, and again

with the consent of the parties read out in the court with respect to the

relevant portions therein as required for the disposal of the present writ

petition.

7. The counsels for the parties have also thereafter been prima facie

heard with respect to the respective submissions, and at which stage, it is

agreed that this writ petition be disposed of in terms of the present consent

order that the petitioner will now challenge the report of the Sexual

Harassment Committee dated 26/29.09.2014 in accordance with law before

whichever authority which is prescribed in law for challenging the said

report including on all the grounds available in law including which are

urged in this writ petition and which were also urged and decided by the

Sexual Harassment Committee in terms of its report dated 26/29.09.2014.

8. I hasten to observe that this court is not observing on merits in one

way or the other, as regards the validity of the stand either of the petitioner

or of the respondent no. 2 before the Sexual Harassment Committee or as

regards the findings of the Committee and the conclusions of the Committee

itself, and all such aspects with respect to the challenge to the report, will be

made by the petitioner before the appropriate authority as envisaged by law

and the relevant rules of the respondent no. 3/employer.

9. I may also state that the learned ASG has rightly taken the stand that

the Union of India is only a third person, neutral party in the present case

being only an administrative authority and that with respect to the aspects

which have been dealt with and decided by the Sexual Harassment

Committee those will be the concern of the affected parties.

10. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of in terms of the aforesaid order

leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

11. The report of the inquiry with the concerned papers are resealed and

are handed over to the learned ASG for being handed back to the concerned

authority.

FEBRUARY 03, 2015                               VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J
hk