The Madras High Court has stated that the baseless allegation of use of unsympathetic language in opposition to a feminine worker is just not a criminal offense underneath the Sexual Harassment Act on the office and the act shouldn’t be allowed to be misused with exaggerated or non-existent allegations. Can.
The courtroom granted reduction to a senior central authorities officer who was accused of sexual harassment by a feminine officer. The courtroom additionally stated that the executive head or head has full authority to do the work and has his discretion and privileges.
The Bench of Justice M Satyanarayanan and Justice R Hemlata rejected the order of Central Administrative Tribunal and District Local Grievances Committee (LCC) in opposition to him accepting the applying of V Natarajan, Deputy Registrar of Trade Marks and GI, Indian Intellectual Property, Chennai. <! –
"It appears that the complainant has made a futile attempt to settle his personal issue with the petitioner," the bench stated in an order issued on Saturday. Every workplace has to keep up sure manners. '
'Misuse of legislation can’t be allowed'
The bench stated that if a feminine worker is discriminated in opposition to attributable to her incapability or some other official causes, then the best way is just not the best way adopted by the complainant. The Bench stated, "Although the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Prevention) Act, 2013 goals to create equality and amicable office for girls within the office by which their dignity and self-respect is protected, it’s not allowed by girls Abuse can’t be allowed to disturb. '
On 2 December 2013, the lady officer filed a grievance in opposition to the petitioner with the Registrar and Controller General of Trade Marks and GI and Patents and Design. In the stated grievance, the lady officer accused her of misbehavior and conceited habits and stated that it harm her shallowness.
Mentioned the time period 'sexual harassment'
The Registrar and Controller General constituted an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) as per the Act. The feminine officer then complained that she referred to a number of incidents about Natarajan's 'impolite habits'. The lady officer referred to the phrase 'sexual harassment' at a number of locations within the stated grievance. The lady officer later wrote a letter to the Tamil Nadu Pradesh Commission for Women, prospecting that the ICC wouldn’t render justice as her grievance was in opposition to the top of the division. After this, the LCC really helpful an in depth departmental inquiry in opposition to Natarajan based mostly on the investigation by the District Social Welfare Officer. Meanwhile, CAT accepted the petitioner's petition difficult the formation of the ICC. The petitioner was dismissed by the Appellate Tribunal after which he reached the High Court.