Karnataka High Court
Sri K S Lokesha vs Internal Complaint Committee on 20 February, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:7274
WP No. 50501 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO. 50501 OF 2018 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI K S LOKESHA
S/O K N SHIVAKUMARADHYA
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
PRESENTLY WORKING AS
WELFARE OFFICER-HR-ESD
ELECTRONIC CITY
BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LTD.,
BENGALURU-560 100
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. H M MURALIDHAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally 1. INTERNAL COMPLAINT COMMITTEE
signed by
BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LIMITED
ALBHAGYA
P B NO.2606, MYSURU ROAD,
Location:
BENGALURU-560 026
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA 2. SMT LAKSHMI
CONTRACT LABOUR, BHEL
ELECTRONICS DIVISION
MYSURU ROAD, BENGALURU-560 026
3. GENERAL MANAGER-HR &
DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY
BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LTD.,
P B NO.2606, MYSURU ROAD,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:7274
WP No. 50501 of 2018
BENGALURU-560 026
4. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (ED) &
APPELLATE AUTHORITY
BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LIMITED
P B NO.2606, MYSURU ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 026
5. BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LIMITED
REGD OFFICE: BHEL HOUSE
SIRI FORT, NEW DELHI-110 049
REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.GANAPATHY HEGDE, SR.COUNSEL FOR SRI.GEORGE
JOSEPH, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R3 TO R5;
SRI.B.M.IRSHAD AHMED, ADVOCATE FOR R4)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE
RECORDS ON THE FILE OF THE R-1, 3 & 4, PERUSE THE SAME,
ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION, QUASH THE ENQUIRY REPORT OF
THE R-1 COMMITTEE DATED 22.03.2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-A,
ORDER OF THE R-4 DATED 13.10.2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND
ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The captioned petition is filed seeking quashing of
enquiry report of respondent No.1-Committee dated
22.3.2018 and the consequent order of penalty dated
14.07.2018 passed by respondent No.3 as well as the
NC: 2024:KHC:7274
order dated 13.10.2018 passed by respondent No.4 -
Appellate Authority.
2. The facts leading to the case are as under:
The petitioner was working with respondent No.5 as
a Welfare Officer, while respondent No.2 is a contract
worker engaged through Shri Udyog Enterprises.
Respondent No.2 lodged a complaint against the petitioner
alleging sexual harassment at workplace, which led to
constituting an Internal Complaint Committee by
respondent No.3. The said Committee after holding an
enquiry submitted its report recommending imposition of
penalty on petitioner by withholding one increment for a
period of one year. The Committee also opined that
respondent No.2-complainant needs counseling and shall
be transferred to some other branch of the company. In
its recommendations, the Committee also directed the Unit
Management to organize workshops/awareness programs
for sensitizing all the employees about the Act in order to
avoid sexual harassment at workplace.
NC: 2024:KHC:7274
3. Feeling aggrieved by the penalty imposed by
respondent No.3-Disciplinary Authority, petitioner
preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority under
Section 32 of the BHEL Conduct, Discipline and Appeal
Rules, 1975. The petitioner while assailing the impugned
enquiry report and the consequent penalty imposed by the
Disciplinary authority, raised several grounds to
substantiate his innocence in the matter. However, the
appellate Authority has by a cryptic order, dismissed the
appeal. Feeling aggrieved by the order of the Appellate
Authority, the petitioner has preferred the captioned writ
petition.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 3
to 5.
5. Both counsel on record have extensively
addressed their arguments. Learned Senior Counsel while
contesting the petition has reiterated the defence set up in
NC: 2024:KHC:7274
the statement of objections and has placed reliance on the
following judgments:
"1. Union of India and Others Vs. P.Gunasekaran
- (2015) 2 SCC 610.
2. Union of India and Others Vs. Dilip Paul -
2023 SCC Online SC 1423."
6. In the light of the law laid down by the Apex
Court in the judgments cited supra, I do find some force in
the submissions made by the learned Senior Counsel that
scope of judicial review in cases of sexual harassment at
workplace is very limited. What this Court needs to
examine is as to whether the appellate Authority has
discharged its duty while examining the grounds urged by
the petitioner in the appeal. On perusal of the appeal
memo, petitioner has raised several contentions. He has
also pointed out some infractions in the enquiry
proceedings and the consequent penalty imposed by the
disciplinary authority. Petitioner has tried to make out a
case that the complaint lodged by respondent No.2 is
tainted with malafides. He has also alleged that
NC: 2024:KHC:7274
respondent No.2-complainant along with her supporters
has misused the provisions of The Sexual Harassment of
Women at Workplace(Prevention, Prohibition and
Redressal) Act, 2013. The petitioner has also complained
that the procedure prescribed is not followed by
respondent No.1. It is further alleged that though several
contentions are raised and the impugned penalty of
withholding of one increment is challenged on the ground
that the same is a consequence of the finding recorded by
the Internal Complaint Committee thereby holding that the
petitioner is guilty of sexual harassment at workplace, the
appellate Authority without considering the same has by a
cryptic order dismissed the appeal. Therefore, petitioner is
aggrieved by non-application of mind by the Appellate
Authority.
7. On examining the material on record, more
particularly, the order passed by the Appellate Authority,
this Court is more than satisfied that the petitioner is not
afforded a fair opportunity and his grievances are not
NC: 2024:KHC:7274
addressed by the Appellate Authority while deciding the
appeal. It would be useful for this Court to cull out a very
cryptic order passed by the Appellate Authority while
dismissing the appeal, which reads as under:
"ORDER OF THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY
UNDER SECTION NO.32 OF BHEL CONDUCT,
DISCIPLINE AND APPEAL RULES, 1975.
In the matter of Appeal dated 21.07.2018 filed
by Shri.Lokesha KS, Welfare Officer, BHEL
Electronics Division.
The undersigned as the Appellate Authority in
the extant Appeal dated 21.07.2018 has
scrutinized the appeal submitted by Appellant and
other related documents and finds no extenuating
circumstances warranting reduction of the
punishment awarded to the Appellant.
In view of the above, the undersigned as the
Appellant Authority hereby confirm the award
passed by Disciplinary Authority vide Penalty
Order ref. EDN/HR/ ICC/ 3781003 /2018-19 dated
14.07.2018.
The appeal is accordingly disposed on
13.10.2018."
8. From a bare perusal of the order passed by the
appellate Authority, it is clearly evident that the appellate
authority has simply put a seal and has given a closure to
NC: 2024:KHC:7274
the report submitted by the Internal Complaint Committee
and the consequent penalty imposed by the Disciplinary
Authority. I find some force in the submissions made by
the learned counsel for the petitioner. The penalty
imposed in the present case on hand is on the ground that
the petitioner is found to be guilty of indulging in sexual
harassment against his subordinates. These allegations
are grave in nature and therefore, the appellate authority
was under bounden duty to meticulously examine the
entire material on record and find out the truth. The
appellate authority has not even taken pains to examine
the grounds urged in the appeal memo. What can be
gathered is that the appellate Authority has superficially
decided the appeal and this has lead to miscarriage of
justice.
9. As pointed out by the learned Senior Counsel
that in cases of sexual harassment, if the proceedings are
conducted by the Internal Complaint Committee
constituted by the company and where statements are
NC: 2024:KHC:7274
recorded, this Court cannot under the garb of judicial
review reassess the entire material on record. Such a
recourse is not permissible under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India.
10. The proliferation of false complaints under the
Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention,
Prohibition and Redressal) Act 2013, presents a pressing
concern, while the laudable intention behind the
enactment of the Act was to provide a robust framework
for the prevention and redressal of sexual harassment, it
is regrettably observed that certain individuals have
exploited its provisions for ulterior motives or personal
vendettas. It is imperative to recognize that the false
complaint not only inflicts unjust harm upon the accused
but also undermines the integrity of the process, casting a
pall of skepticism over genuine victims' willingness to seek
redressal, as they fear the repercussions of potential
disbelief or retaliation. The apex court in catena of
judgments has observed that Sexual harassment in any
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC:7274
form at the work place must be viewed seriously and the
harasser should not be allowed to escape from the
clutches of law. However, has also emphasized the
importance of scrutinizing the veracity and genuineness of
complaints to prevent any misuse of the law. The delicate
equipoise between affording succor to genuine victims and
safeguarding the rights of the accused is paramount.
11. The sacrosanct duty of the Internal Committee
and appellate authority in handling complaints with
meticulous care and prudence cannot be overstated. They
are enjoined to engage in a scrupulous examination of the
evidence adduced, conduct impartial investigations, and
adhere to the strictures of procedural fairness. This entails
a judicious evaluation of the credibility of both the
complainant and the accused, the procurement of
corroborative evidence where feasible, and the provision of
equitable opportunities for adversarial presentation. The
mechanical ratification of reports proffered by the Internal
Committee sans due scrutiny constitutes an affront to the
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC:7274
principles of natural justice. The appellate authority bears
the solemn responsibility of independently assessing the
evidentiary record, furnishing cogent rationales for its
determinations, and ensuring the dispensation of justice
devoid of partiality or prejudice.
12. The deficiency in the appellate authority's
approach is manifold. The appellate authority, by means of
a cryptic order, has confirmed the decision of the Internal
Committee. Such a modus operandi, characterized by
brevity and lack of substantive analysis, falls short of the
mandated duty incumbent upon the appellate authority. In
light of these deficiencies, it is incumbent upon the
appellate authority to rectify the lacunae inherent in its
approach. This necessitates a recalibration of its modus
operandi to align with the prescribed standards of
procedural fairness and due process. Specifically, the
appellate authority must undertake a diligent and
thorough review of the evidentiary record, articulate clear
and reasoned justifications for its determinations, and
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC:7274
ensure the dispensation of justice devoid of partiality or
prejudice.
13. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that
reassessing the matter afresh at the hands of the
Appellate Authority would be crucial and relevant. The
fact that the appellate Authority has not discharged its
duty to meticulously assess the evidence on record to
come to a firm conclusion that the report submitted by the
Internal Complaint Committee would not warrant any
interference, the order passed by the Appellate Authority
is liable to be set aside. Though, I am not inclined to
interfere with the report submitted by the Internal
Complaint Committee and the consequent penalty imposed
by the Disciplinary Authority, to meet the ends of justice, I
deem it fit to remand back the matter to the Appellate
Authority to re-hear the matter in accordance with law.
14. With these observations, this court proceeds to
pass the following:
- 13 -
NC: 2024:KHC:7274
ORDER
(i) The writ petition is allowed in part;
(ii) The impugned order dated 13.10.2018
passed by respondent No.4-Appellate Authority as
per Annexure-B is hereby quashed;
(iii) The matter stands remitted back to the
Appellate Authority with a direction to re-hear the
matter afresh; and
(iv) Since petitioner and respondents 1, 3 to 5
are represented by their respective counsel, they
are directed to appear before the Appellate
Authority without further notice on 18.3.2024.
On the said date, the Appellate Authority shall
issue fresh notice to respondent No.2-
complainant and thereafter proceed in accordance
with law.
Sd/-
JUDGE
ALB
