Kerala High Court

V.R.Babu vs The Local Complaints Committee on 2 December, 2022

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                   PRESENT
            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
    FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944
                         WP(C) NO. 26694 OF 2022
PETITIONER:

            V.R.BABU, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O RAGHAV, VIYYATH HOUSE,
            CHENDRAPPINNI P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680657.

            BY ADVS.P.K.VARGHESE
            M.T.SAMEER
            P.S.ANISHAD
            K.R.ARUN KRISHNAN
            JERRY MATHEW
            REGHU SREEDHARAN
            APARNA ANIL
            RAMEEZ M. AZEEZ
            K.JAJU BABU (SR.)


RESPONDENTS:

     1      THE LOCAL COMPLAINTS COMMITTEE,
            REPRESENTED BY ITS EX-OFFICIO MEMBER,
            DISTRICT WOMEN & CHILD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,
            THE DISTRICT WOMEN & CHILD DEVELOPMENT OFFICE,
            THRISSUR - 680 003.

     2      XXX

     3      THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
            (GENERAL), OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF
            CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THRISSUR - 680 00.

     4      THE MANAGING COMMITTEE,
            VALAPPAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK NO. F.207,
            VALAPPAD POST, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680567,
            REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT

            BY ADVS.K.S.ARUN KUMAR
            P.C.SASIDHARAN
            VIJAY SANKAR V.H.
            SRI.THAJUDHEEN -SPL.GP

      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.12.2022,
ALONG WITH WP(C).25274/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C)NOs.26694 & 25274/2022
                              -2-



          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
 FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA,
                            1944
                   WP(C) NO. 25274 OF 2022
PETITIONER:

           THE MANAGING COMMITTEE,
           VALAPPAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK NO.F.207,
           VALAPPAD POST, THRISSUR, PIN- 680 567,
           REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT.

          BY ADV P.C.SASIDHARAN


RESPONDENTS:

    1      THE LOCAL COMPLAINTS COMMITTEE,
           REPRESENTED BY ITS EX-OFFICIO MEMBER,
           DISTRICT WOMEN & CHILD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,
           THE DISTRICT WOMEN & CHILD DEVELOPMENT OFFICE,
           THRISSUR - 680 003.

    2      XXX

    3      THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
           (GENERAL), OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-
           OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THRISSUR - 680 001.

          BY ADVS.K.S.ARUN KUMAR
          RAJEE P MATHEWS
          SRUTHY UNNIKRISHNAN
          VIJAY SANKAR V.H.
          ANANDALAKSHMI SANKARARAMAN

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 02.12.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).26694/2022, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C)NOs.26694 & 25274/2022
                              -3-

                          JUDGMENT

[WP(C) Nos.26694/2022, 25274/2022]

The afore two cases are edificed on similar

factual matrix and the reliefs sought for are

also interlayered, if not, interdependent.

2. Among the two writ petitions, W.P.

(C)No.25274/2022 has been filed by the Managing

Committee of 'Valappad Service Co-operative

Bank' ('Society', for short); while, W.P.

(C)No.26694/2022 has been filed by Sri.V.R.Babu,

who is the Secretary of the said Society.

3. Compendiously, the genesis of the

controversy is that the 2nd respondent in W.P.

(C)No.26694/2022 - who will hereinafter be

referred to as the 'victim' - made an allegation

against the petitioner that he had committed

various acts of sexual harassment against her,

including rape.

4. It transpires that the 'victim' made a WP(C)NOs.26694 & 25274/2022

complaint before the statutory Local Committee

(LC), constituted under the provisions of the

Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace

(Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act,

2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act', for

short), which led to the order impugned in these

two writ petitions.

5. Through the impugned order - which has

been produced on record as Ext.P1 in both these

cases - the LC made certain recommendations,

including that the petitioner in W.P.

(C)No.26694/2022 be removed as the Secretary of

the Society; that action against him be taken

under the provisions of the Kerala Service Rules

(KSR); that enquiry be conducted against him to

find out the truth of the allegations relating

to certain Savings Bank Accounts of the Society;

that the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC), as

per the afore mentioned 'Act', be constituted by WP(C)NOs.26694 & 25274/2022

the Society; and that all the staff of the

Society be sensitized, by conduct of classes and

other requirements, as per the 'Act'.

6. The Society challenges the afore order

as being wholly without jurisdiction and beyond

the competence of the 'LC'; while, the

petitioner in W.P.(C)No.26694/2022 argues that

the 'victim' could never have invoked the

jurisdiction of the 'LC', since an 'ICC' has

already been constituted by the Society as early

as in the year 2020.

7. Sri.K.Jaju Babu - learned Senior

Counsel, instructed by Sri.K.R.Arun Krishnan,

appearing for the petitioner in W.P.

(C)No.26694/2022, submitted - taking me through

the time lines of various events which placed

between the rival parties - that the allegation

of sexual harassment was interwoven into certain

other disputes by the 'victim', much later than WP(C)NOs.26694 & 25274/2022

when she had made the first complaint; and that

further imputation of rape was something which

was thought-out by her even subsequently and

added in, by way of a counter blast, to wreck

vengeance on his client.

8. Sri.K.Jaju Babu argued that, therefore,

when there was 'ICC' constituted by the Society,

the 'victim' could never had invoked

jurisdiction of the 'LC'; and that, going by the

impugned order, it would be very clear that

said Committee has acted in a very casual and

lackadaisical manner; and that there is not even

a whisper of a conclusion that the allegations

of sexual harassment had been established -

though it is whisperingly stated that the

complaints against the 'victim' were made by his

client and by the Society, because she has

spurned his advances for sexual favour.

9. The learned Senior Counsel then pointed WP(C)NOs.26694 & 25274/2022

out that the 'LC' has even spoken disparagingly

about the anticipatory bail order issued by this

Court in favour of his client; and that this

clearly establishes the mala fides in their

action.

10. Sri.P.C.Sasidharan - learned Standing

Counsel for the Society, adopted the afore

submissions, adding that the recommendations of

the 'LC' are not 'recommendations' at all, as

required under the 'Act', particularly when they

have directed the Society to take action against

the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.26694/2022 under the

provisions of the KSR. He pointed out that the

provisions of the said Rules are not applicable

to the Society, unless it is specifically

adopted - which has not been done; and further

that the stand of the 'LC', that an 'ICC' has

not been constituted by his client, is also

factually incorrect, which is evident from the WP(C)NOs.26694 & 25274/2022

documents on record.

11. Sri.P.P.Thajudheen - learned Special

Government Pleader, submitted that the enquiry

into the allegations of the 'victim' against the

petitioner in W.P.(C)No.26694/2022 - including

for the offence of rape - is still going on;

and that same will be completed without any

delay. He also affirmed that the petitioner in

W.P.(C)No.26694/2022 has obtained an order of

anticipatory bail from this Court.

12. The analysis and evaluation of the rival

submissions as afore would render it indubitable

that if an 'ICC' had been constituted by the

Society, then the action of the 'victim' in

having approached the 'LC', through a complaint

was impermissible. This is perspicuous because,

Section 9 of the 'Act' makes it limpid that an

aggrieved woman may make a complaint of sexual

harassment at the work place to the 'ICC', if so WP(C)NOs.26694 & 25274/2022

constituted; and only otherwise to the 'LC'.

Obviously, therefore, if an 'ICC' has been

constituted by the Society, then it is for the

said Committee to have taken cognizance of the

victim's complaint.

13. That apart, I find great force in the

submissions of Sri.K.Jaju Babu - learned Senior

Counsel and Sri.P.C.Sasidharan - learned counsel

for the Society, that the impugned order does

not really do justice to either of the parties,

since it makes no affirmative findings on any of

the allegations made even by the 'victim'.

14. Apart from whisperingly passing

references to certain assumptions of request of

sexual favours by the petitioner in W.P.

(C)No.26694/2022, there is no conclusive finding

on any of the allegations of the 'victim' - as

to whether it is right or wrong, or whether it

is proved or otherwise.

WP(C)NOs.26694 & 25274/2022

15. This has crucial relevance in these

cases because, going by Section 13(3) of the

'Act', it is only if the 'Internal Committee' or

the 'Local Committee' - as the case may be,

arrives at a conclusion that the allegations

against the respondent have been proved, can it

recommend to the employer or the District

Officer - as the case may be, to take the

action, as are enumerated therein.

16. In the case at hand, as I have already

said above, the impugned order virtually makes

no reference to any proven sexual harassment

instance, but makes very fluid observations on

the allegations of the rival parties against

each other, as if they are in dispute. I am

certain that this was not the way an 'LC' could

have acted; and in any event, since it is

conceded before me that 'ICC' had been

constituted by the Society, it is certainly for WP(C)NOs.26694 & 25274/2022

the 'victim' to approach the said Committee,

rather than the former.

In the afore circumstances, I allow both

these writ petitions and set aside Ex.P1 - which

is the order impugned in both the cases;

however, leaving full liberty to the 'victim' to

approach the 'ICC' of the Society with an

apposite complaint, which shall be done not

later than two weeks from the date of receipt of

a copy of this judgment; in which event, said

Committee will proceed to assess it in terms of

the 'Act', after affording necessary opportunity

to all sides of being heard and of leading

evidence; and thus complete necessary

proceedings, as expeditiously as is possible,

but not later than three months thereafter.

Needless to say, depending upon the report

of the 'ICC' as afore, the Society will be

applicable law, adverting to the judgment of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dr.Vijayakumaran C.P.V.

v.Central University of Kerala [(2020) 12 SCC

426], without causing any delay thereafter and

within the strictest time frames.

I also leave liberty to the parties to

approach this Court for any clarification in

this regard, if it becomes so warranted.

Merely as a requirement for reiterated

clarity, I order that the Police Authorities and

the Prosecution shall continue with the

investigation to the victim's complaint,

untrammelled by any of my observations herein

and as per law, within the shortest time frame

as is possible.

Sd/-

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25274/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER/FINAL REPORT DATED 11/7/2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO OF CHARGES DATED 5/3/2022 ISSUED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO OF CHARGES DATED 16/5/2022 ISSUED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19/5/2022 IN W.P(C) NO.15235/2022 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN BAIL APPL.NO.4068/2022 DATED 14/6/2022

RESPONDENT EXHIBITS

Exhibit R2(A) TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.

350/2022 OF VALAPPAD POLICE STATION

Exhibit R2(B) TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE BANK MANAGER DATED 30/08/2022

Exhibit R2(C) TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF THE COMPLAINT ISSUED BY THE VALAPPAD POLICE STATION DATED 30/08/2022

Exhibit R2(D) TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT OF THE PETITIONER SUBMITTED BEFORE THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KODUNGALLUR, CHIEF MINISTER, DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT, SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THRISSUR DATED 31/08/2022 WP(C)NOs.26694 & 25274/2022

Exhibit R2(E) TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 17/09/2022 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE PRESIDENT OF THE VALAPPAD SERVICE CO- OPERATIVE BANK WP(C)NOs.26694 & 25274/2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26694/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER/REPORT DATED 11/7/2022 ISSUED BY THE 1" RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE OF THE MEMO OF CHARGES DATED 05/03/2022 ISSUED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19/5/2022 IN W.P NO. 15235/2022 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT

EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 14/6/2022 IN B.A NO.4068/2022 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT

EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE LEAVE REQUEST DATED 01-02-2021 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE SECRETARY

EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 05/08/2022 IN W.P. (C) 25274/2022 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT

EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF WP(C)15235/2022 FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE THIS HONOURABLE COURT ALONG WITH ITS EXHIBITS.

EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE THE DISTRICT CHILD WELFARE OFFICER DATED 19.05.2022.

EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF INSTITUTIONS IN VALAPAD PANCHAYATH IN WHICH INTERNAL COMPLAINTS COMMITTEES WP(C)NOs.26694 & 25274/2022

ARE CONSTITUTED.

EXHIBIT P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES BOOK OF RESOLUTION NO.2371 DATED 03.01.2020.

EXHIBIT P11 A TRUE COPY OF LEAVE REQUEST DATED 09.08.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P12 A TRUE COPY OF FURTHER LEAVE REQUEST DATED 12.08.2022.

RESPONDENT EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT R2(A) TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.

350/222 OF VALAPPAD POLICE STATION

EXHIBIT R2(B) TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT OF THE PETITIONER SUBMITTED BEFORE THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KODUNGALLUR, CHIEF MINISTER, DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT, SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THRISSUR DATED 31/08/2022

EXHIBIT R2(C) TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 31/08/2022 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER

EXHIBIT R2(D) TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 31/08/2022