Central Administrative Tribunal - Ernakulam
P.N. Santhosh vs Union Of India on 12 June, 2012
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ERNAKULAM BENCH
Original Application No. 966 of 2011
Tuesday, this the 12th day of June, 2012
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.R. RAMAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE Mr. K. GEORGE JOSEPH, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
P.N. Santhosh, aged 45,
S/o. P.K. Narayanan,
Puthenparambil House,
T.C. 18, 1693(1), Annoor,Tirumala PO,
Thiruvananthapuram-695 006. ... Applicant
[By Advocate Mr. Vishnu S. Chempazhanthiyil]
Versus
1. Union of India, represented by the Secretary,
Ministry of Youth Affairs & Sports,
Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi-110 001.
2. The Director and Programme Advisor,
National Service Scheme, Ministry of Youth
Affairs & Sports, Shastri Bhavan,
New Delhi-110 001.
3. The Deputy Programme Advisor,
Nation Service Scheme, Regional Centre,
RV Road, Basavagudi, Bangalore-560 004. ... Respondents
[By Advocate Mr. M.K. Aboobacker, ACGSC]
This application having been heard on 04.06.2012, the Tribunal on
12.06.12 delivered the following:
O R D E R
By Hon'ble Mr. K. George Joseph, Administrative Member -
The applicant in this O.A was working as Youth Assistant Grade-I at the Regional of National Service Scheme (NSS, for short) at Trivandrum. A complaint of sexual harassment was raised by two women employees against Shri K. Rajendran, Assistant Programme Advisor, the Head of the Office. On the recommendation made in a preliminary enquiry, a detailed probe was conducted by a Committee Against Sexual Harassment of Women at Work Place in the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports wherein the applicant was examined as a witness. The Committee gave a report holding that the Head of the Office as well as the applicant is guilty of sexual harassment. Without looking into the contentions raised by the applicant, a penalty of compulsory retirement was imposed by the Disciplinary Authority on the applicant which was upheld in appeal. Aggrieved, the applicant has filed this O.A for the following reliefs:
"1. Call for the records leading to the issue of Annexure A5 and set aside Annexure A5;
2. Call for the records leading to the issue of Annexure A9 and set aside Annexure A9;
3. Direct the respondents to reinstate the applicant back into service with all consequential benefits;
4. Regularize the period of suspension from 12.9.2007 to 13.12.2007, i.e. 92 days as duty for all purposes;
5. Any other further relief or order as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper to meet the ends of justice;
6. Award the cost of these proceedings."
2. The applicant contended that the impugned orders were vitiated by violation of the basic principles of natural justice. On the date when the enquiry was held, he was not even aware that the enquiry was being held against him. In the enquiry, no opportunity was given to the applicant to adduce the evidence in support of his innocence. The Committee had not discussed any objectionable evidence against the applicant. The Disciplinary Authority ought to have examined several circumstances indicated by the applicant which would confirm the fact that the allegation against him is totally baseless. None of the mandatory conditions prescribed in Rule 27(2) of the CCS (CCA) Rules regarding the manner of consideration of appeal has been followed by the respondents.
3. The respondents in their reply statement submitted that a Committee Against Sexual Harassment of Women at Work Place, after conducting a detailed enquiry on 18th and 19th May, 2006, had recommended initiation of disciplinary proceedings against two officials including the applicant. Orders have been passed by the respondents only after completion of the disciplinary proceedings and obtaining the advice of the competent authority.
4. We have heard Mr. Vishnu S. Chempazhanthiyil, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. M.K. Aboobacker, learned ACGSC appearing for the respondents and perused the records.
5. The preliminary enquiry report dated 07.03.06 placed at Annexure A-1 starts off with "A complaint of sexual harassment was received from two women employees of NSS Regional Centre, Trivandrum - Smt. T.R. Suma and Smt. Kala Devi against the Asstt. Programme Advisor of Centre, Shri K. Rajendran." The report ends with the recommendation to refer the allegation made by the two female employees along with the observation of the preliminary enquiry officer to the Committee Against Sexual Harassment of Women of the Ministry for enquiring into all the issues involved, as this is a case for further enquiry. Again, the enquiry report of the Committee Against Sexual Harassment of Women at Work Place on the complaint of two lady officials of NSS Regional Centre, Trivandrum, states at the beginning of the report that the complaints of sexual harassment were received from two women employees of NSS Regional Centre, Trivandrum - Smt. T.R. Suma and Smt. Kala Devi R, against the Assistant Programme Advisor of the Centre, Shri K. Rajendran. For conducting a free and fair enquiry, Shri K. Rajendran, Assistant Programme Advisor, NSS Regional Centre, Trivandrum, was transferred to the NSS Regional Centre, Hyderabad. Further, it is stated on page 10 of the enquiry report as under:
"In order to examine the allegations leveled against Shri K. Rajendran, APA, the Suspected Public Servant (SPS), the following officials posted at the NSS Regional Centre were examined in presence of the committee.
1. Shri K. Rajendran, APA (W1)
2. Shri P.N. Santhosh, YA-1 (W2)
3. Shri Pandian, LDC (W3)
4. Smt. Shobhana Gopakumar, UDC (W4)
5. Smt. C. Jagadamma, Sweeper (W5)
6. Shri K. sumandran, Steno Gr.D (W6)
7. Shri S. Krishnan, YA Gr.I (W7)
8. Shri K.P. Kumaran, Chowkidar (W8)
9. Shri G.P. Sajith Babu, Youth Officer (W9) Apart from the above officials, the complainants viz. Smt. T.R. Suma, LDC and Smt. Kala Devi were also examined by the members of the Committee."
It is made clear that the officials listed above were examined in the presence of the Committee in regard to the allegations against Shri K. Rajendran, the Suspected Public Servant. The conclusion of the enquiry report reads as under:
"Conclusion:
Based on the documentary evidence and the oral depositions of the two complainants viz. Smt. T.R. Suma and Smt. Kala Devi R. and the nine officials of the NSS Regional Centre, Trivandrum, examined by the Committee, the Committee has held that Shri K. Rajendran, APA and Shri P.N. Santosh, YA-1 are guilty of sexual harassment of working women as defined under Rule 3C(1) and (2) of the CCS Conduct Rules, 1964. The evidence adduced before the Committee establishes that the alleged acts of these officials amounted to 'sexual harassment' as envisaged under the explanation to Rule 3 C of CCS Conduct Rules, 1964. Further, these acts of these two officials are unbecoming of Government servant and amount to "misconduct' under Rule 3(1)(iii) of the CCS Conduct Rules, 1964. In view of the above, the Committee recommends initiation of disciplinary proceedings against Shri K. Rajendran, APA and Shri P.N. Santosh, YA-1, as contemplated under CCS (CCA) Rules, 1964, and imposition of suitable penalty as indicated under Rule 11(v) to (ix) of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1964.
The Committee also took a serious view of the allegations leveled against Shri K. Sumandran, Steno Gr. D, Shri S. Krishnan, YA.I and Smt. C. Jagadamma, Sweeper, who abetted in the commission of sexual harassment at work place against Smt. T.R. Suma and Smt. Kala Devi R. The Committee therefore, proposes that recordable warning be issued to them to be reflected in their respective service books so that such incidents are not repeated in future."
6. It is clear from the records of the case that the enquiry conducted by the Committee Against Sexual Harassment of Women at Work Place on the complaint of two lady officials of NSS Regional Centre, Trivandrum, on 18th and 19th May, 2006 was against Shri K. Rajendran. Incidentally, the applicant also was found by the Committee guilty of sexual harassment of working women as defined under 3C (1) and (2) of the CCS Conduct Rules, 1964. Therefore, we find that there is merit in the contentions of the applicant that he was not aware that the enquiry was being held against him and that he was merely a witness in the enquiry and that no opportunity was given to him to adduce the evidence in support of his innocence during the enquiry that was conducted. Therefore, there is violation of the principles of natural justice in as much as the applicant was not given adequate opportunity of being heard on the allegations against him and no opportunity to defend himself was given during the enquiry. The impugned order at Annexure A-5 states that the enquiry has been conducted in the manner prescribed under the rules and observance of principles of natural justice has been ensured and that the delinquent employee has been afforded reasonable opportunity to put forward his defence. But we do not find anything in the enquiry report to substantiate the above assertions by the respondents. There is nothing in the impugned order to show that the points raised by the applicant to defend himself have been considered by the Disciplinary Authority with due application of mind. As the proceedings against the applicant are vitiated by non observance of the principles of natural justice, the impugned orders are liable to be set aside.
7. It is commendable that the respondents have come down on the perpetrators on sexual harassment of women at work place with a heavy hand. In the case of the applicant, it took five years after the enquiry to issue the order of penalty which is to be deprecated. The procedural lapse on the part of the respondents in regard to the applicant should not come in the way of meeting out justice. Accordingly, the O.A. is allowed partly as under.
8. The impugned order at Annexure A-5 dated 23.02.2011 and the order at Annexure A-9 dated 15.09.2011 are set aside. The respondents are directed to reinstate the applicant in service forthwith. The case against the applicant is remanded to the respondents to proceed against him, as per rules and to conclude it within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
(Dated, the 12th June, 2012)
K. GEORGE JOSEPH JUSTICE P.R. RAMAN
ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
cvr.