HC to govt: Give benefits to man after sex harassment case is closed

Panaji: In the wake of a closing report from the internal complaints committee (ICC) in a case of sexual harassment in the workplace, the Bombay high court directed the govt department concerned to act promptly and to ensure all available benefits are conferred on the employee who was accused.

The sexual harassment complaint was filed in July 2022. Three years later, the man accused of sexual harassment went to the high court, stating that he was deprived of all his service benefits, including his right to promotion and transfer, on the pretext of the inquiry pending with the internal complaints committee.

The court called for the report of the ICC, which was placed before the bench in a sealed envelope. It contained the ICC’s closing report with the complaint, investigation process, and statements of witnesses whose names were given by the complainant. The accused was directed to appear before the ICC, was questioned, and his statement was recorded, concluding the inquiry.

The court observed that the findings in the report are categorical and state that the committee reached a conclusion that offences against him were in no way sexual in nature and therefore the case is not one of sexual harassment. The report also contained recommendations stating that since the complaint is not of sexual harassment, the department may look into the matter.

The report by the ICC, the court noted, bears the signatures of all members except one who refused to sign, as according to her, the matter did not proceed as per the prescribed procedure. The ICC’s presiding officer said that she was not willing to sign the report and did not attend the previous two ICC meetings which were held in her absence.

In the wake of the closure report being forwarded to the department, which bears the signature of six other members barring one, the court stated that it is of the view that the department must also now draw curtains on the proceedings.

“We expect the department to act promptly and make way for making all available benefits being conferred on the petitioner,” stated the division bench comprising justices Bharati Dangre and Nivedita Mehta.