Pallavi Pandey v. Kendriya Bhandar

1. Petitioner took up internship with the respondent w.e.f 16.4.2012 for eight weeks. Petitioner pleads that during the period of internship one Mr. Yudhvir Singh (Junior Salesman) caused her sexual harassment and details of which are given in the writ petition. Petitioner was hence forced to lodge an FIR. Evidence in the said criminal case is going on.

2. Petitioner also lodged a complaint with the respondent. Respondent had initiated departmental enquiry against Mr. Yudhvir Singh and which was as per the direction of the Delhi State Commission for Women. The 2013:DHC:3895 petitioner questions certain orders which have been passed by the departmental enquiry committee and seeks to quash them in these proceedings. On behalf of the petitioner, following submissions are made and reliefs accordingly claimed:-

(i) In a case such as the present it is necessary that the petitioner who is a complainant be associated with every date of hearing in the departmental enquiry because the Presiding Officer cannot thoroughly and in details know the personal details of the sexual harassment and therefore presence of the petitioner is necessary for effective conduct of the departmental enquiry.

(ii) Petitioner also seeks right to get copies of all proceedings in the enquiry proceedings. She also seeks all the depositions of witnesses besides the documents and pleadings which are filed by both the sides.

(iii) Petitioner seeks to be represented by a representative of her choice and preferably a lawyer.

3. Learned counsel for the respondent on being put the aforesaid issues raised by the petitioner, could not seriously dispute that in cases of sexual harassment such as the present, the Presiding Officer would necessarily will have to have assistance, guidance and help from the petitioner, because factual issues of sexual harassment will necessarily be known in detail only by the petitioner personally. Also, counsel for the petitioner is justified in arguing that effective dealing of the complaint of the petitioner can only be if the petitioner receives the depositions, documents and the copies of pleadings and is also allowed to be accompanied by a representative.

4. The law with respect to conduct of enquiries with respect to sexual harassment is now well settled and guidelines were laid down by the Supreme Court in Vishaka and Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors AIR 1997 Supreme Court 3011.

5. It could not be disputed that respondent has to adopt guidelines with respect to enquiries in sexual harassment as laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Vishaka (supra)

6. I may at this stage put on record that learned counsel for the respondent has stated that in the peculiar facts of this case respondent, without prejudice to its rights, is not questioning the maintainability of the writ petition, however actually the respondent is not an instrumentality of State under Article 12 of the Constitution of India and therefore, the writ petitioner would not be maintainable. I agree and the present writ petition is decided in the peculiar facts of this case without in any manner of the respondent being held as an instrumentality of State. I may state that every High Court is fully entitled under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in an appropriate case to issue directions even against private persons, and which in my opinion are required especially in cases of sexual harassment.

7. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed and disposed of with the following directions:-

(i) The Committee constituted by the respondent which is enquiring into the complaint of sexual harassment made by the petitioner against Mr. Yudhvir Singh will allow the petitioner to be present in all the departmental proceedings including causing her appearance on the dates of hearings which are fixed.

(ii) Petitioner will be given copies of all pleadings, proceedings, depositions of witnesses and ordersheets of departmental proceedings.

(iii) Petitioner will be entitled to assist the Presiding Officer with respect to her complaint and therefore proceedings accordingly can be conducted by the departmental committee on sexual harassment.

(iv) Considering the sensitivity of the situation and the mental and emotional condition of the petitioner, the petitioner will be entitled to be accompanied by her representative in the departmental proceedings, however the representative will not be an Advocate.

(v) In case any proceedings have taken place prior to passing of today’s order and the petitioner/complainant feels that the petitioner needs to file certain documents or examine any further witness or cross-examine the witness whose depositions have already been recorded, then petitioner will be entitled to do so and for which purpose, dates of hearings would be fixed by the departmental enquiry committee.