Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 – ss.2(n), 3, 9 – Sexual Harassment – Appellant-faculty member of the University lodged a formal complaint on 26.12.2023 with the Local Complaint Committee alleging sexual harassment on part of respondent no.1-Vice Chancellor of the University – LCC rejected the complaint as barred by time as the last alleged incident of sexual harassment occurred in April 2023; whereas the complaint was filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation of three months as also the extendable period of limitation of six months – Writ petition, thereagainst – Single Judge of the High Court quashed the order of the LCC hold that the appellant was subjected to threat of detrimental treatment in her employment even after April 2023 and as the Vice-Chancellor created an intimidating, offensive and hostile work environment for her, as such the complaint was within time, taking the subsequent event as the last incident of sexual harassment – However, the Division Bench set aside the order passed by the Single Judge – Correctness: Held: Last incident of actual sexual harassment took place in April 2023 – Subsequent incident of August 2023, whereunder the appellant was removed as Director of CFRGS, with no financial implications arose out of a complaint received from the Central Government undertaking wherein appellant was specifically named – It was a collective decision taken up by the Executive Council and not a unilateral action of the Vice-Chancellor – Actions taken against the appellant in August 2023, are administrative in nature and does not create a gender based hostile environment, and thus, fall short of being actions amounting to acts of sexual harassment – No direct link between the last incident of sexual harassment which happened in April 2023, and those referred to subsequently in August 2023 or December 2023 – Alleged act of harassment of April 2023, was a complete act in itself and had not continued thereafter – Subsequent events have no connection to the earlier act of sexual misconduct and as such, fall clearly out of the preview of acts or behaviours amounting to sexual harassment – Thus, the incident of April 2023, remains the last event related to sexual harassment – Furthermore, the appellant was conscious of the fact that her complaint was delayed proves that she herself treated the act of April 2023, to be the last incident of sexual harassment and as such, tried to explain the delay in filing the complaint – Division Bench of the High Court committed no error of law in restoring the decision of the LCC – Wrong which has been committed against the appellant may not be investigated on technical grounds, but it must not be forgotten – It is directed that the incidents of alleged sexual harassment on part of respondent no.1 may be forgiven but allowed to haunt the wrongdoer forever – Thus, this judgment to be made part of the resume of respondent no.1. [Paras 21-27, 29-34]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Nidhi Jain. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.