Roshan Balasubramaniam vs National Law School Of India University on 17 April, 2008

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Roshan Balasubramaniam vs National Law School Of India University on 17 April, 2008

Bench: Ajit J Gunjal

IN THE HIGH 000121' or KARNA'l'A.KA,_ 

DATED THIS THE 17m my  A A

T':-IE HONTSLE MR. JUSTf{'_}E AJIT ﬁf A

WRIT PETITION No  014*  (GM-RES)

1 leosrmu  v«13A£;A§§:iJ_$l€AM:  
 
UNfVE'--RSi'I7Y» NAGARBHAW
'BABiGA£;pREf56'0O72:: 

(Ey~ sn1  ADV. 1

   ENATIONAL LAW SC3H00!.- 0E 1.!-.rE.!.-2 
'  ;_..REPRESEh"PED BY ITS DIRECTOR

A' .1"§EA.Cu%-', 7"'BHA'v'I, BANGALORE-560072

I     SEXUAL HARASSMENT INQUIRY

A COMMITTEE, RL'.PJ_3Y  c.o:~:vE2~.roE
*   EHANKAR REDDY, NATIONAL LAW

" V SCHOOL OF INDIA Ur'-I\I'I'v'1"'.'1's':.'.-'5T'I""1'

  AA  "NAGARBHAVI,BANGA.LORE-560 072

     SEXUAL.  pone? mvzso.-2

ELIZABETH, NATIONAL LAW 8CHO(_JL

OF Em}.-+. 'v.'..v'h'I'v"1i."'%i'F"f', NAGAREHAVT

BANGALORE-560 O72
 RESPONDENTB.

. .. PE} '1'! ';"Ji'v'}-ER.



4'

(By Sri UDAY HOLLA, SENIOR ADVOCATE, E 
FOR M/S HOLLA 65 HOLLA ASSOCIATES}-w__" E  S  »

THIS W.P. FILED UNDERARTICLES  is?
or  ooHSTrruTioN, PEAYTNGTE EEELAEE THE

RULES 7(4),7(6), 8,12,12,13(:§)(iv); «14g,ii)¢n14:{ii3§,._ 2:5, 
21 (ii) or-' THE CODE, OF.  €!OMBAT.."*---..ASEfXUA.L=  

HARA8S}.'!E!'IT 2002 OF   1Q:"§$5'?'{)NL'aE.'h"P

HEREIN AND THE ENTERE com: °{INi._*.4.»NX. A; A AS
UNCONS"i'I'T'"U"TT(')NAL.    

QUASH THE -.HOTIdE 22.4.2004 m ANX. B

ISSUED BY  T..l'%'2  }A}'u"Jt  

THEREUNDER. '-   

PROun.""'EL'l'N{':S

THIS E'«~;?ETn=1oH  EEEH 1_nm_m_3 JLND
RESERVED, otcommoom «F'QR PRONOUONEMENT or
ORDERS TH:S* E.w.     DEi.._i'v"'z*h"€x:"?i': THE

!«'OL~L£.\w"i~1§l(}::'1  ~ A
V V H WnQRDER

-- » EA.T1ﬁTé   this writ petition is questioning the

  of  Rt.-.g1_1.lnti.onS .f the Coal: to C%!'.-.;.t

 2o-o2, aw short The codea 

 ,_i:hc.u respondent herein and  the Said -
 .. , tpro'viSionS as unconstitutional so far as the petitioner is

'  'oonccmcd.

--J.-- 'L£_.l.'_. _J._J.__'I -._.. ..n... l.'_l'I___..... . A

2. Fa'; on y mu S: 
/

- v

/

I'
Y



3

The petitionefis etudﬁng hi one of LP!!=f%?.*stehgi.oue
 it-Ion:-magi-u 'HI'.-.&:_._....I

.141 o 1., immcqy, 1'lI:I.l.lU1lﬂ.l E 

University, (mow), the first fjj  Y

 

initiated against the petzitziontzr outta?  on}:  

oompioint lodged by onoigs. ti ssL:;.B.% Horn;

(Complainant) sttigiotit   tit-.i-.-t-..-t-.it_~,-.

gnaw'-

The mmﬁu. "as; it of the Code to
the soxusi   Respondent No.3,
and tiiot  complaint, a copy or
wh1c11.ii§:iﬂi_iett'1 In the said complaint Ms. 3
nos   wen '''''''''''*..':''u m ----I

u an HJVM "M

toogiotitionoi-.  is the said soxuoi

harassitiasit by

   

" -   out in the complaint. A reading of the
 L'  i would disclose that a request was made
" .   to constitute an Enquiry Panel as

ptoviooo u..d. r the -3

Vi

....e of ..l'-.e first enaent. ghe has

         the enquiry be ooncittctod to look

  into the acts of the petitioner, member, student Bar

Association (11 year B.A. LLB. Hons). The Facilitator who

acted as ﬁrst known point of contact was Ms Ape .





\!itt...,=-I M<':1"...'L.".'.", St-"' t Bar A".-~".a*'~r ' "*'?f~.'_'l"*l-_"-
B

. Hons). This form A was .33 dd,' M

complaint dated 5.4.2004, which    one
what actually transpired on    of J

Annexure---D would  to "e 
Code into the acts  wished to furnish
certain    for the purpose
of iesuhig notice. The details of the
 events !||.f!'|.ie.h. 11...-are *.'.":.l£'.m

 for.  the controversy in question in as

" *  __  ee thle'  is required to decide the constitutional
   Code and not to pronounce on merits. It

to  2353,2094 the m1.:!t.icnc.I' ea.-cage rec grime

   X  L'-araiei   attempts to contact the
TL --    She received certain message! on her
     mobile phone to apologise lbr fear of consequences E' a

complaint is made by her. The rest of the complaint

I

'.I.'e!.'.*.l!! die-.cl% that em wga.-'~..e-...-he-'.. tire I-'.-e.e'.l.'*..-am.-° L.



I"-n

arnlmar S ldeﬂt Bur -unnio. 

>
3

IT!

Mmnl.

u-W-noun, av-. Itasca ' IIQA «lulu Kl-

h

E31-

-1

 Irnnu
."

"AI
12-

iv

B.A. 1313.3. Hone), appointed under  

on 29.3.2004. Henceta  '
31.3.2004 and a detailed  3..  iodpzii' ff  3..  

5.4.2004, a copy of
n_  i 

3.  to  notice was issued
by the;  .tt;w1eic3respondcnt-2 1.3., Sexual

  asking  petritziotier I1:

 "lg  'uh   . nnnn Ll ..... 1.. a.s......_ :..:.__:
app-eat' ,....i........'..:i.-..~...u._c:.-g g.9.4.4v\.r'r. ne 'v"vu;a * 1 cu

with    i.e., copies of the complaints

   31%.3.200--.4-and 5.4.2004 given by the complainant
V   rcespondnet--3. The petitioner was also

to  through the said  and i'I_J_rn_is1h his

._ 1..

 an-I I-annulus':-Ion-u ml an --all-I-. O-In... ......_Id.d._._. _
IV-II» _ U

I nun-A _ . -I---L.-------------4 "-
-Lguau uuunu 1 1 U]. Jul Lu w1.u.u:: 1 I11 I I I

 V.  by Saturday, i.e., 10'" April 2004 at 2 RM. A
 preliminary objection was raised by the petitioner heme

rcspondeiit-2 inter alia contending that prime. fneie the

complaint itself woo 0.03m. He won! all -.I.hmi* that

--------/
\



6

tlic       the

_ru-um; __|_x_.__._f:

V uou""'t': and 'u1t:'" mﬁfﬁ t':alteu"" 6.4.£lJU'f anally, ,_"nnn"*.'.jilt*:Ta::pear*T f'f'"'"

on 10.4.2004 are bad in law. 
cbjcctlcnc in the said    

applicability of the code; ct'09tcr.ccciplaltttlc
c.«.:nt..rc_ry tc the Code,  egg  met.-; tltc
      1-1  the
Conetltuticl1_joif__Intl;:ie".V';'   contend that
certain  liable to be struck
   fairness and arbitrarlnwe.
  ieeueﬂ... by the ,r.-ewi.-...er tr..-

the Director oi-'._i:'l'te" ﬁrst respondent University,  aﬁa

" =  _   'hie «version that in fact there is no incident
   of  iialrasemerlt, in as much as, he being a junior .
  the complainant being a senior student. In

§'an&- Aha IIl'l'\IIll'I cnnrnnnf that ﬁn. uunh eunlnl-Ewnnhinm nvinfn
In'-CU,' Jul'! "\-I'-I-In'; DUI-LEVI?' Hm II'-I §§_J\-ﬁll IYKKAEFIIYHIH VIIIIIUWUIW

V l'  «.   the complainant and  According to him. a

   reading of the complaint itself would expose the total

absurdity about the contents of the complaint. He would

also contend that as per Rule 8 of the Code, the Director is /.1



£';'l'."'.",}'-.."L'J'.... u...

E?

(1 (13 II' that rvunnlninf In i-n 
who u guniuu. .1»: law  ' 

lal-IN! \.I\ltI'-II Id} \n'\JI.¢IJI.I\J\I.

under the Code or under the mncipies 

procedure, according to him.  

present case.

V '1 nnuI--nu 1-I!'-mi---.-I
'll-.1 UIIIT. IIHLGII.

!  
I

A '1"-In 'I"'IlIlII' vnQa1I\t\uI-Iavlnﬂ-|Cr._ -Ie'ugde£:ag|4|nnI-
ﬁfe IIIKJ .u.l.D|. l'§3£f.'-III'-I'-i!§I.n }.JI...-lt.'.N~l__.ﬂI.ll.n

16.4.2004   the  Heraesment inquiry
Committee    D. Bhankar
Reddy;     Thomas, Member
am}. [33    me  wee :_ai:_ao

ﬂ ' '_ _' " ;-- .'..=.1.;;........ I...'-....... 4.1.- ....:.a t1..............:.u.__ _._.-1
.u.uu.1' uu _   pycyzu umun: um auiu UUIHHHLISB mm

attendtx   a copy of the some is

 at  A request was made by the
V  VA  keep the proceedings in nbeyance on the

t'  1_lh¢_3I'€_! are ¢_:e_I't1,ain1t.a.t.=Lm__in the Qode ale!' and.

a.|,.._:_.._A"_._.__ .l.._L____.|__ _1_L'__A._ 2_ _1__u_:_.-__¢___ ___I ___;._1__..___.__ _;-
 "ETC IIIIIISICIIL GGIGCEB IIIIEIBEIUII BI!!! (@1  (H

 w  present proceedings, a copy of which is to be ibund at
 Axmexurc-L. Annexure-K is another petition to keep the

proceedings in abeyance unlii disposal of the application

'.I!b.ich was g!I."'" W .!''..i...'!'. on l4.4.2"04. "W" Mﬁﬂ

1-inn hr.'



made another eppﬁcnﬁon a army 0*' -"~*-'~ is

us It .l.uuu . HUG",

'ﬁn-I3.-.

ulul ""I.iiTl§' ﬁiﬁi if] the eariier  

certain important questions    
the complaint as well as the    _  J

enquiry under the said   iﬁes

. '  .a.;;.-- ...'E .. I- iv
 by m .e-.3: mswndeent-.s_muhm'"*ung~ that he had

ﬁflfliied his mind  and according
to him a  as and if the peuooner
has   do so before the Enquiry

 this  by the ;n.n,=t.. mp-ma-ant

..n  "aV3.p.p-;-ndﬁ -' . 11.11 

  ﬁled the present petititm

t =V:f§i1£it:'it_;is.'tznconstitI1tionaL

, ' n n |,__ __;,5 ___...__, r\__1___. rrnax _a-«Ans .n -,-s
. Azrwmrding tu tun pcutinm, mu :1 ;, rm, 5, 1.4,

  i3(A)'(iv), 14 (ii), 14(iii), 14 (V1), 26, and 21 (ii) of the
 Code of the first respondent and the entire Code which is

produced at Annexure-A is wholly unconstitutional in so

far as the petitioner is  He 11.5 -=1-A so---'~* 'M

...- __ uuwv nanny av: '
/
I' ' O
I:
V



J

9 -- we ----r ' w ' uunuvu e e£\J\J'Ip E  

I:'i'u"'t'1i.iCfi'1 at Afmexure-H  upon tine  to

appear beibne the Committee  it ' ;  

\uIItDIﬂ\l

6. The respondents Vpnotiﬂegi   

me they !'|.1.I.'."e med. .t.."i¢:**-."'**-"Fe;-fi.t ai"e'aj:w<*aionu. on the

.0 HIBIIEW

av-estirwﬁ rvf  'i?_-'I'ﬁ§'*=1':1?§':"._.suepeneion. of the
°11<Il|i1'Y     «peﬁﬁm. this court on
6.5.200fi"hi$es  mg:

 appearing for the
't-'.--'%'* _  .. as the  counsel

ﬁilpemmg  respondent-University.

   frhei  tor the petit:l.o.n.er is +.......h-t the

  is conducting an cnqtﬁry

an .a=Qo-J.e '.-.'hi.-zh has I'ﬁ'a'il"ii'.Iy'  despite

_   a__previoue Code which has been
" _   '1or"~:1neajunder the rules ii-amed fa' the National

Lt-1weA'i.St:hool of India Act, 1: is the .eu.-*...Im

 ggrlevance of the petitioner that if the enquiry is to

..   131-nrlaun i-'I-sq um...' 11...:

....... uwiwwwueenactedhytiieﬁrst

' it    it .e 4_ i"espondent _Un_i\_reroity, the petitioner will be
= , _  nosing opportunities to defend his right and it will
" notbeafairenquiry and he will also an

u 
of the opportunity to cross-examine the witneaeee
m be .-;.xami.".e"u in the eriqiiiry. Further. it was
subtnitted that this is not opportune time to
conduct such an enquiry, since the petitioner has
exams durim this  $4.1 t.t:e'-A.-.':-.3 *.¥*.1i %"t

¢%

1'



I..- ....-..-I § 1] mild 

1.-_._.... 1.. _ ...... " 4,',
.lI'Ul.l.l ULETIC U1 tlullii UIIVI 61 LIIBJ IiI..|\n InII$Il\_9--I\..II§\-?_' u.

enquiry should not be allowed to  ' 

appearing for the respondent.' subzsiund  » _ 
such esiaminatioris are tﬁiducted t.'»=*'f.-.*'-v.:_'..'.*=g.?re_.*.;.-'to; the 2
year and at every one   

an examination cons1_ucte&._b3'  'end >'
t_11er¢_:£ore it may      
enquiry at any time ifsueh a  is to be
 F.'I.iI"'ﬁ'1I':i','," it-_   the-.t all
opporturzities  be   % the petitioner and

he will not  opportunity to
-.1 re.r_I.   ..__Q;,_q"_ 

an M imsu; _'._in't 11:11-v

cw.-n

»'.' " »_ -r

 t.:'ie_ s---:f¢c*ra}"'ma'ee;".a's pro-"..'...-.m.
by t.t:.e"'_  tam the complaint ﬁled
agairistiethe petitioner  which the enquiry is

 """    all the materials
 onreserxigstlszsi-ot'tl1eviewﬂ1atitisnotprope1'to
 stay   which is 'oehig 
agairast the .. gieﬂtioner. Further, a direction is

V. _ issued. to t11e'1'esponde11t not to take any action

.   on the cs.-rzclusion of the  until the
  disposal""'"of this writ petition or after taking

A  orders  this coma'.

  learned counsel appearing. for the
..'.:'w'-tw-rnihr u.n..:l.eI.'t._...nkcs th,s.1: an necessary

],'.I-IIIIJ uuuy
u.

1.  documents will be supplied to the petitioner in
V . *' advance before   starts. -

Post the matter for prelminary hearing ' liter

9
four' we-~.,..ks.

It appears thercaitcr the enquiry was 

7
""~- ---=-**-' was b.-.1.-zg e"..j'.'>'.J..".|Il'.:€! .ﬁ.'o:.n_ I..i;I.;e m  As to
I I!

/

-.



 

"Inn
1"": IUJ

the deiay in disposal of this writ  

matter, but suﬂioe it to  
made by the petitioner that    it

ﬁve years course and  deem-§,)le@'dthe
"This court   13.8.2007 referring
to various   learned counsel lb!'
the   is not a case when-: the
  the  -.a_m_i 

   certiii- es that the student has

    suocessiuny but also oonthrs good
   :"_''the student. Hence, permission was denied to

it '   T!i¢_!i'¢_:a_ﬂ_i1.!1' t_h.e matter is iis.Itr.-.11 for !'I.e-;..rizI.g.-

L A'   Thepetitioneraiterﬂiingofthewiitpetitionhasiiled
   additional statement of facts in support of the

memorandum of writ petitiori submitting that neceeaary

sunporting documents could not he ﬁled along urifh H19 A
....__'_ __ _j_ ___--..--...-.....----------- w-vwuut qnqu---u aw-I-I -I-nnvri-I I-III!-I IVJKI Iﬂlll

%



 -     an: aumaac under the Code. They would turther
   ;4titatj..noI1e of the Regulations of  Code are in

 C 1
f v  sateguard' the interest of the complainant as well as
 the person against whom proceedings are initiated. In fact

t '=-**""" =_'tt-teat'.-:"1 1  a'v'eimenta 

3
E
E

the memorandum of writ petition.    
documents which have  
paragraph are part of the    _ '

U3
3
n
B
r
I
I»
E

.l..l..l. '1 3'}iJﬂ€';ﬁ.}t.a to   have ﬂied
statement of objections_'  that the said
Code  decision of the
Apex    Vlkcshu us. can of
  wculd ma-..-.a that

4.1....  ....-a " Li.-

l..l..I  "*i.'_'  Gode wouid deﬁne sexual

  and formal mquest for initiating

3
'.
c
I'D
('1

..:...cn of India. Thw Wﬁ also

'"'***'d that the Code is a so-if  Code wlich

certain speciﬁc contentions have been  in the

Hﬁﬂln "  4'. A
................. .. . Lgmvaaw ...%';t3g ¥r'§G}ﬁuu.u m gnuxuyxca U! Q

I
r

V L
-/



natural justice and the right to  Thus,
struck down on the ground  is. 1
further the contention  an   it
there is violation of  ijustiice,  as
much  no fair  ts  havng

regard to em fact  as e-A---c.-....'---ms *-I--sﬁ a .....s......_,-

member 017*'-13¢'     die time in the your

   p.-y ___ _net.i____er  with some

document, on*.iw"i;«?:L2w?. The ccw of the ietta uuu:u"""""

_   the petitioner to the first respondent is
1'    the said application it is stated that the
  petition is pending before this court and the

   proceedings under  sam""' uou"" 'we. 'i'i'n':

constitution of the committee that conducted the
proceedings is also questioned on the ground that then: is
no independent person in the Committee which is,'

'5!

I
\



V' , uuuupx

required under law. This assertion is  the

'ma -r-no------ ---------u

mm - h t  Qeet_1_a. Devi Iyap1_g'""'§.?!_::!: 

independent  of the  f-:iae.. 

a lecture who -conducted   4-:

respondent University. at 'is__ aleo    
received remumeraeion/1'ee Fei§,~:-c    the ﬁrst
    the 
aga1nst€.thIe  inﬂuence the other
   Ms. Geetadevi. Hence, a
reooeee.  the position Pursuant to that

an aﬁiﬂnelit    0
.54. 13.': 3.4 an

nu. uuxu-gr u . "us:

.9_2nn'7_ T13 d niﬁrlnuif -In

V  tc    who was the e of
e V:.V"thc~vtii*at«vi'espondeI1t University at that point of time. The

%" eamoeooot would disclose that Me. Geeta Devi, one of

  of the Committee constituted to look into the

4"-**'-*-'&t 413.1% against the mﬂﬁcna was --......"lw.... as '-

 Research Associa' te in the first respondent Umvers1' 'Q1 

10.6.1991 1111 June 1993. She was also employed in the

academic year 1994 as a guest faculty and in the A

/Q,
/



I5

 period i.e._. betweez; 1994 9_!!.*.! 2  "*""

ugh: .11',  VJWWIE

M was not at =-" --"-='-'*-'

nu nan!!!-lﬂtcu   

Umvcraiiy. Wncn the Oomm_1t.tee__  in  
2004, she was paid a     Ifagte at  

hearing for the    'ﬁne

T pleadings.

  with magma to the
vancmy   a denial ormtmm 
is   to hm-., am ﬁhﬂ' ea"ﬁi'x'":iiiir1g

the __<-:'i<'._ti"x:*:,'-~iio1f1'1esiic 'Tribunal the court usually

  see that the enquiry should be in
   with the principles, of natural justice.

"  him, the damage iniliclaed  the eerie

- ............. nu  to the

e    I  _p-=;;=_....uue;- to c1"ﬁss-examine which would amount to

   vioiaticm of the principles of natural justice would be a T

ground for this court to intervene and quash the

pmceedir1gseventhoughtl1ee11quiryrep9:t1e:ntm.;-ads --

\



ll
him-an. '°

.1111: Jnaﬁehii, iearrieti  counseigreat

pains to impress the court that the show  

also be a subject matter oi' jqrzlitxialt   
that if there is possibility  V' of it

natural jiisﬁoe imd. the:  ﬁ€"ti%4', wotﬁd

we on =.ndiootiori   is to be
oonducted wouid be  of natuml
justice.    learned senior
counsel   -to the me  L:-. ee

the   in which the. enquiry conducted

and full  'written: is requioed to be given to the

 'V *  __    his case.

12,; In  ';t'.-er as '.*.---.=.!idit_',' of the uuuﬁ itself is ooiioemed,

~  he S'u'_!_lInii3 that the very constitution of the Ommittee
L ' it     j':  Regulation 8 is unconstitutional on the ground that
 ____5therc must be an independent member sitting on the

 committee. He iurtiier ubiiiits t.h.s.t o..n.e of die m-mi-~

Alliulciﬁlliuhlw

.' ...... t............-e was a  member of the 





.'-wyemndeeeﬁtt Ur.iv-"-'e. eety. Hence", she m""'et ue""%. .'°lz'3'""I:1~5.lGu"' un""

an independent member of the   4_ He

would further submit that u1e.ecetitntten%'ei':e wotild' 

also include any other   '      3

which would attract    oil" the
with the faculty   of the Enquiry
Oommittgg, eﬂhle   to what is BI-IIC
Ieegunatione of the said Code

against  4"{k'x'1e is sotiﬁht to me 

does not at all. He further submits that

   give any legal assistance to the
     According to him, the code does not

'  an mm-I f .9. M0 .... e.Lt.hev'!*.y e.g.-.*..i"..e*

I-Ilvrirwuuvr v--up gun? a up uguu
__ 1.4.-

   ordef7~oi'the 

 h    13. Mr. Udaya Holla, learned senior counsel appearing

for the reapondenta would contend that the Code itself is a

a
5

self  cede. He 1L-:'!:he.v' e-..I.'.m-.ite that the -

,t V
'i
u

I)

a
S



18

Code has been enacted having regard to 1'

zendt-med by the Apex mart in the eaﬁ 

((1997) 6 sec 241). He   '
guidelines laid down by the  V
is sexual harassment  is  1a.!.1:3kinde'ef

physical contact etc. He he the enr.,n_I.1;.I3,r

is at-ac %ple'*ee-d.     tﬁ is
not puhiished   passed by this
court   by the petitioner.
 To':   nf t.h.. letu-ned mtmwl
   submit     a
  does provide an opportunity to the
  put forth his case and right of cross-
% -   is also given. Indeed according to him the
 ail peeeihle eent_i.rtgeneiee. In so .i.'.-=.-.r 9.5 no
     being pnrﬁiided he Wntiid submit  an appeai
Z   the eneatune of the statute and there can be no
' inherent appeal from the judgment. In so far as

permission to appoint a lnwyer, and principles of natural 0.

W I



iI!_!"i 'I5 vi  he an

J'. --*----'--i an in':

deiinquent to take' ' 'assistance' of any ottlet'  

instant case, the Committeeheaé 
the notice of the petitioner       J

assistance of any   " 

n-*,_...t.*.tier.-.e.'- has not,  !'.tae'eame."  far as the

contention . of the Enquiry
   was raised in the writ
    ehe 1.m.a._n an.

   with the ﬁrat respondent

    she is an Advocate in contact with
    and is well versed in the matter relating to

t'   and hence she I;I.ra.s 1.1. meIn__LI.-'1' of 

r'V.w....§.;>.~: 4-... .. . ..I ......

uuu,|uutt.Uc. HG 'V'vl".iu.li'.'l. Ii'-Jill ti-'t 'i'' ii? iﬁ ir1 dCﬂt

t      Thus, according to him, the petitioner cannot
 h    claim that the entire pm-ooedme adopted by the Enquiry

Committee under the Code is in violation of any of the

SIAUALLBS;

,__

//Z

/

___________________________...___J



20

15. i haw: g'1"v-u-:1 my an-:'.ous  

submissions made by the   'A   '

appearing for the petitioner a.s~wcl1   »  

16. '1-.d.ccd., t..- q1_1t:sii;§:1.._%wo1iizl_ ho 1  the Code

itseif is vioiaizive ofthe  of  and if it not

35

which 1  in of principles of natural

j1§sﬂoe?..?f. 

_ 1.71   is an on' shoot of the decision

A{ 'k   Apex court in the case of Vilmsha vs.
    s£%s12.sas:mn, reported in 1997 (5) sec 241. The
 bezm the Ap-.-.x cs-.-.2-1 was  for

   n T i11.t14ir1ge1nc11t of a i'1.1nciamcnini rig'r1'1:*.s oi'Wis'iz-13 "w\nu'""'€:'i.T1

'  A' 1  -  jifundcr Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of mam,
which was brought as a class action by certain social

activists and NGOs with the aim of assisting in ﬁnding

forre.-A-.11-..s.*.i<1.'1r.:ft.mu'I.1:.er.ar.11n:antof .

'  ;/;1
J



_" , ...__ _ __ _.._

_ der euualitv'. :1 to prevent eexﬁ  of
working women in  work-pieces  
and to fill the vacuum in  
sexual harassment of   it  ':
violation of the    

-=..-.h-.1 he . ght to,  e.'.1¢VrVi"'1-*'ir!4:'.'!.1I,r'.""ﬁ.=.!F!,i,f:!.!.:§.i!%m e -..__I-A-=-~

unﬁt: In I. may lawn:-,,

vioiation of the  14. 1' and ii of the

coneutuhoh.   "

18. ****   of the ftmdamental rights

 of mate m. euzﬁde.-':*J.y
a_1np1itutie't   aii the ta' acts.' of gender equahty
  of sexual harassment or abuse.

  and right to work with dignit_y, which is a

II{§aI;JflIlZl3llIf inn:-I 'end-In Imllilhafl Iilﬂhf   ('lit-If"'
 SE13' lbbkﬁlllilall  h .l..II..Ia|-Ilﬂull -Ilﬂllu 1.1.1!'-I l'I.1J\nR~ V.f\lIAlIu

  disposing of the  petition has laid 
guidelines and norms regarding the duty of the emphyer
and other responsible persons in work places and other
institutitlne deﬁning what is sexual hameement. 'lhe -

z
' J

1/



22

 harassment includes 

 

physical contact and  (ix) 3;  
for sexual favours; (c)    (ti). 
showing pornography:  to tﬁamy * 
ph.ye.i.ee1, trertael oi;     nature.
Fievoﬁﬁve :'5tc'TJﬁ;  ﬁeoiplin.-t-..I'y a.eti.on;
worker's  the  party
    to combat sexual
  inatndate given by the Apex
cote-t;  enacted the Code to combat

 i :1"19:;~..4:_:V'The:Vpi'camble of the Code itself would disclose that

  is enacted so that every person in the

at-us. f--'-is  r=.n..t1d (38.11  a life of dignity, free

\l'\'-IO! A so

oi' the

    Constitution in protecting and nurturing the dignity" 't of the

individual; the values to which the University is
committed; the ideals of the Convention on the A

«/5 -
X



A ,__;p_nv   II

E111."-.inat'.m at All .-or-.1-.e of L*i.....-.*=-.*.:':a.*.1i=c:_.j\'22,4 *-..A.,,.._..~n'3ne-

Women, 1979; the principies  down 

in Vishaka vs. State of Rajaathané {1997t)%etrsec ' The
first respondent University   1.  "

and pmeedures to    
in tlie ﬁrt pﬁ  ...cu.c..W..:..'....,...... ........
the principles  in the once shaii
be exclusive;   through the ﬁrst
   of sexual harassment
 to"regt;1aﬁon 41A), a person who is

V  H 4 _  'Mum "H4" Gf aka'-In amm:

or é6f1Siv?1t':1"'§'«i'u"ﬁ'.iEf:}f hcmcn a nu-um

hamccmcnt  make a complaint directiy  any

  "Tor the Regstrar or the Director 'm which

V" at  member, Registrar or Director as the ease

adwnse the eo1npla_in_a_nt of the mechanisms

nu-p;~ w ----c--

aivajiabie under the C-oﬁe. Pio'v'ided tn"-t 'v'v"here the 'u".L':'d1"'u

 'c.._u:i'eq11ires any ccmccuvc action to be taken against my

person for sexual harassment, the matter shall be referred

to the faculty member or the Registrar, to the Sexual

"urn-s.rn..ent Lnquhy Committee mt). the  

IJIQJ IHHF

W2

.{



24

act in aeeeniance with the mgulatione. The for the
ptirpese ef this aide mall incl-ade all  in

teaching positions, guest  3116' V' 

faculty teaching assistants,    5

in t.he organisation ofa hoaiuse,
'.-zerﬁop o:~g__:;;x_;g3._g;1_    The NLBIU
adminmaﬁvc  iemrmraiiii  n      hoaw1 stair. secmity
  service at NLSRJ, and
 of their relationship with

:~zLeIi;.: 7%  1:9 be a pm of Nmlu.

A A    which is relevant would be regulation
  T_ "  iwhich deals with appointment of Sexual Harassment
  The Director is empawezed to appoint a

'*--"-'W-" annu.-2-.l1y 1;-:2  as 9.  Harassment

9 V
 .I.l.:\a.|A uvn

'   '.  .  'gpolice Adviser. subject to  such adviser at-.a'.:

be a female xacﬁnty member. The job entrusted to the

Advisor is for proper and eifectzlve implementation and I
eiiminisuation of the Code. Another duty entrusted to them

/

FV



J

-- HI! Vb\lI$LIﬁ

Advisor is to £I_!;.l!.I!!.|t. ow-T -=I-H-- emu;-axe-at 'pi"""".  oi'

enqun'"ji. Regulation 8 is regarding 

Harassment inquiry     
consultation with the Adviser  sex. ;g;  _  J

Policy Advisor shall alsogeonstituter  l 
sh ll mnsie... of thxee _ oﬁe  oi' the
  gt  member and one
additional fcinale  be an independent
  of the NLSIU community and
 of se.1:I.1a! !1.!I:.!'9..%"..en.t as a

 of  body likrnvise. Wherever the

 '*5  -vistas woman, the majority of the members

  12 would relate to ﬁling of
  roouest for inquiry $111113 unwelcome sexual

' A eonduet: '@215 sexual hnra.sezit.. Q11. rm;-.i.pt of such "M

.1 4 uslnlullulg

the Reg.strar,'Dir-actor,   i-'oiiey Adviser,

it     Pass on the request to the Sexual Harassment
  V  Inquiry Committee. The formal request ﬁr enquiry is

requiredtobemadeintheprescribedFormA. Reﬁtion

13 would relgite to prooe:|.u.-'e for inlti.:.-.t.im a?' 

.3?



26

Regu19.*..io.r1 14 would reLa.... to 

Regulation 17 wouid  to     me

enquiry report submitted or   
Committee. Indeed, the Oode   

also could be a mode ofbvﬁrzgoeee'-aie   

II. Part IV womzi, to mt"-"ﬁw Mﬁon v.»mt.!e.r

reguiation 21.     actions
suggested    or censure.
    harasement workshop
   " "e.~w--'i'§his is the bird's eye View of

A    of Mr. Panchu, learned senior
   V'   for the petitioner is that under
  2 {0} Rjw 2m and regulation 8 would clearly

 that the mnsﬂrdﬂon of Eeauai I-{arae'"'*-"*u.u...... m-....""5'

  A '  .  deeoommmoe is improper cannot be accepted. indeed the

{""'"""""""""""""7

  h    oontention is based on the premise that one member was

a faculty member at an earlier point of time and she being

..

¢«_Ieee_e!'I.;!1y £!.!_i!_i(_!t_!i_1_i_tf_!tl witl; I.:l_1e A 4?

Jr-M. 'iv is f be nan-UJ up In-Ir

--nliﬂed. are mu.-..ty w -'1 fl ''1 other person in the Le' a proyamme, seminar or that in this lemma :2 J petitioner to the the queetionirg the 5:?+'it'ae ei' au'".da'v'it m effect is who was Director on-. that Ms. Geetadevi was oniyl' a faculty member only for one 1991-93 and 94. Amor 1994 she that she is a. faculty member who is t:o--~----sit on the enquiry. Indeed the Enquiry j T_ constituted by the Director and Conveyor of ttee is on the one oi' the other. ___- mc--m'*ucn*s "f the %ﬁt'uee is a iheuity' ﬁber. A '. - :>_'.:What is essential under regulation 3 is the third member

---------------'-T l must be a member who is associated with an N00 or other body which would deal with the issue of sexual _he_1'ese_rne11L Indeed in the et:.a.te.m..ent oi' ol.1}ee1'i_ens 3.19:! by % "'-""'"""""""""""'1 A ,I''I' :. ' ' *-.!_.Jf'1.l!I"'i';a"".3'_-ﬁ'.ﬂ.'_"y'. ml... f'I..:=¢I-Va 9 is the fwesfsendeﬁt it is a'u:i€n*d 'dist um. . 9. practicing Advocate and is associated 'ens nature and has some in "

harassment; Hence it    'A

 or  
disentitie her    ass, by :16
stretch of the as 9 n of

faculty utgdzsr; use/ssk £11) can be construed to hold" In fact if the is te be pe.n.1eet_l she hes Assumiiig that she as oi:

the way the year 1991-93, a decade has A gene ceased to be 9. faculty member and shej:is:«.Ii6t. any way associated with the tint nespondent 9 In so far as powers and duties of the Advisor is concerned, it is to be noticed that it is in furtherance of t_he djpecﬁon issued by the Apex Court in Vishaka's case. 3

In fact a duty .s east :1 the Adele-...w te ens-...Iv'e C5 tit.-.n:.t me IL 1?, K """""""""'------7 29 said Code is strictly implemented and n-.gula'rl,y' the i'tinetio1":it:g and %.<.*..t-.'ene-.;~.s 6 the ~- a serious objection is taken petitioner regarding the 45 along with the Di1'ectore{_u'IJ.ndei" V _ shall e_r;t.1_re the of the liarassm-e.-it' "-'aEong~.v.'ith the n..m... No sinister powers and duties of the is required to see that yspampxemenma and regularly renew' the 1't1;.¢:1_1;o:I.;r;§ of the Code. She is also saddiexiivith tine;-_ of h'-wing woa".caR1@. She is al.-o A _ kc appropriate action when' aueged-" ' T. harassment is brought to the notice or 7 to the NLSIU community. Indeed regulation read, c.a.n.not he in any way as has A4-In-Inna I-WKII ' 4. . _ ianoonstituiioxlai. The prapraae of-a"--pp"u'in'd.'1g tm. nut ' under the Code is to over see that the Code' is strictly implemented. The implementation of the Code is subsequently bifurcated into various functions which the / Advisor is required to take note of. In so cbjecucn talgen rega1_'d_ing the ' Adviser to the th:-eughteut t'I"1¢T-. enquiry is concerned, it 3 unconstitutional, in as much at, me to assist the victim This dm not that t.l1e..n:. is ~ her limits 93+. assistance given to the victim. of enquiry would at case so that the enquiry is ' 23;v.A.v4:'ii'ezg:ti1atio11 12 would relate to make a request for " mediation or to hold an enquiry. The request lsmasde to the Director, the Registrar or the Adviser " V R21" my mmber cf the l"-'wulty w mg» m any .1-.e:-'-..-%' cl' the Any median" "on ' shall terminate immediately on ﬁling of such a request. lam unable to appreciate as to how this procedureh M, 'J J wn*........-mplatm for '1c""-"- 1 mm; an enquiijr Apparently an enquiry is set in ram pa complaint The said »cf._g under regulation _12 and a " bell J made rcwtiing 'f_3._.l;1(_1 to hoist ml the

-sm-'d wmp""'1t.

24. Rcguln um for of 'A to be unconstitutional. _ Except for in*.*..ia*..im1 of an ._ is . nothing concrete or of substance is service during the course of the ashtoiiow regulation 13 is unconstitutional. In 1e:nj[gsceé,tteck on regulation 14 which would rehte to 'conduct enemy, it is m m notice-'... the-.* "~-

1. usu yuﬁvwi p to be as against regulations 1411:) (iii) and (vii). it sub--regulations would contemplate the committee h will have power to ask certain questions which have been submitted by the party under regulation l3(A_l. This new-sn..e.v'i.ly n-.-can putﬁn "curt .----'-;-w "I: 'I 'E ' X '-

I .......g u :. ﬂu wuusm I-U uh' ' u.Iumlﬁ"u. 5 V ;I\ Z 1 puts certain questions "net: .dis._ unconstitutional. Indeed Ztlndgzf. than V parties are at liberty at the time of oral new Lme cg:

3. an -....---.I_ -._ ii-.;. ecnstruw. as Iil'T:"ub'i'iu'{';t'?1'§¢'3iie?:3|.}'ﬁ._% fui' as 1 5 ii 11 i4(vii) which hearing all the and upon perusal of Committee shall within in the R.egi.I1I|;rt_a1' r.=o11tt.I_.in.in_g its afid dc-ate;-**"miI'iati'on whether the Code ' The enquiry including the applicable » proof, shall be guided by the consideration " not a criminal' proceeding or a proceeding of any II ..........

of law which womd net.:esso_ri_|,y 'r.nes.n H1 t it

1...... 1......

C " ._ per ta-"e tn (3; "ac-fer ofa d'mr:s"uc c':i'1qun'y'-"'"'.

26 is in respect of in camera proceedings. In fact, this regulation would be advantageous to both the complainant as well as the petitioner, in as much as, all 4;) /W 'K ' Idle 'v.Id%n;-tS""' "'-

r' """"""'IJ nrmeedinns me requtetl to be held in 27 niso Wotiid state t:'"":.-.u. in om"

contemplated conﬁdentiality 'be _ pseudonym shall be used 4*:

fact a comprehensive of give ..ny i.n.d.i....tion__.t.n_. petitioner. In fact at stage ~ the rontzso-at-:pl'.=tte that oonﬁderltiolity is I opportunity is given case. It cannot be saioomot end-.ioaded'§ only in favour of the *".;o._'. .1' his nature, one is required to consider Virr Whether the incieient as and as to who could be the initiator of 25', 1! fact, it is to M no on so as to position of the Ativisor as a Judge as 'visit as prosecutor. In fact it is to be noticed that the Advisor is not a member of the Enquiry Committee at all. The Policy Advisoris entrusted with certain responsibilities to ensure Z 34 the implementation of the Code. The fant run-Iv-sauiil-as #114: Dnlitur ﬂrlilriaﬂﬂi rich'; '--. II' UUIIWLIIUU la-II': 1 VII", I1\I']-101 uuba .' -II'-II: . vv 1' unconstitutional. in fact alone who constitutes the *1 instant case also the

26. Another the 1m"ne'u wmsei appearing 4foI'__ right of cross.

violates the principles of be accepted. Indeed, during the Committee has made available .I.I.. ...:;;a._I.;_ __;-_-_V.'... '....|:'~'.__1_ -.__--1.: __1...a._ ¢.. LL- ___.-.-.I._. run... LI": Vbflilbll WULIIU ICIHLC II.' [113 t:.ll.qul.l'y. 1115 would disclose that on a request ' 'road?! petitioner the petitioner has been given the i' A '.v'VtoV..e:'e1'oss-eixamirie and to put questions to the To name a. the smtelnents oi' the students, ' ._ _ "who were ﬁesent on we date ofthe incident have El'''v'v::'i'1 ' their statements and additional statements are also ﬁled. The statement of the petitioner is also tiled. In fact in his statement he has given his version, including his defence. /,1 4% / ' 1 In fact, he would suggest that it was the oomplzatinsxlt who was the initiator. It is not for this court at thin group an H1 um-rnr-ﬂy gf ﬂj|_e _ ﬂ Inlplulhi "W" J-I 'HI-J\-O I '-14! 'CHIC-D compiainant and 'net witxlesses 4' ..,of' j ﬁled, the complainant time to file her replies to the petitioner and hi enrifnnuanu In W' .

1-lit! " 5.?! ' C3???

9. {czif the me mad-

avaiiabie. fof enquiry. it is to be norms has given evidence m petitioner was given time and cross-examine the complainant. _ an I.I'-ru-an If n¢n1n-i-u\I- has unit' that Jusuacvuu. 1:Vu.|I\a\.-, .lI- kruiuavb us:

3:

E (1 (3 E E ai" wuuu. name »A was denied the right to eross--exa:mine and = the principles of natural justice. 1tistobenotioedthatt11eApexCourtinthecaseof no &na.nn¢1& ﬂ'....I'.... .ﬂ.4n---nn.n an: ﬁr ﬂ E II JIIZIU Ililllyﬂ WI Vlllvililby W l"'" "'3 ochcn,A.I.R. 1969809 198hasobaervetiina. proceeding of this nature which is conducted pursuant tom 4} / petitioner and his wimcsecsy . I l a Code ofan educajionttl m_t_i...;....n,. t. " a nuanmm an at and ii' 4.1-... ..

"-"WW =- = {1} mt: w'i'~36ﬁ has 731° nature 0*' "16 accusation made ancran wt 're required to be given to him 3 Enquily Committee earlier, in tllli: present an 77 thﬁv . ..,...... ,i.........;.....-.. 4- . V'--vi-V; he Vlfvln-I|_'-.I\ll$oI Ii&ﬂ' ].I|.I'l,|,Q,[ [D _ ._ ___. 1'.-_.

angi-._ mee--exauu.uc the .witn¢gggg_ 23- 1" 3:55' 'Wins pmviacd. it cannot be ie tovwbe noticed that whether m a. J. " " . yr:-v.1j_lIA\|\J\4l U1 AJUL .13 E lnI'CII.l-LIIV 01 I116

4...¢.. .5... :2.-.. _' 1:

us I ,i'i'.- the statute does not provide A-" v _ f'03fiicee.« not necessarily render the Code had.

in the case of Durya shanlcar Hana: us. 'V heltj . git is Weii imam: that an appeal it! a creature of 'atatuteandthenecarnbenoirﬂmmentridatnf

-- --~v---- --------- --c.---- up RPPCGI from 311.'! Jildﬂment or detenninntion I_1__I_1Iems an anus-ni i ..m-........1 M nu,

---------- In-I-I lg the law itself." "Emmy ﬁﬁﬁaa w W 37 It is to be noticed that under Regulation 17. C__e certain action 1 !'f_!q!.'.1mt'. m be recommendation submitted uqnﬁnrﬁ I B I implement the points that the enq__m'ry by any great; or i!!e;.3a1-;tj;~« it is '- a:uJImn------I-

.6 .;.....m.-.. re-:-.:iae:oz1 A1753; when thus:

--. ' .a)=f"-,?l'het'--e.__I"€egieu'a1' the *reoomnnsei1:ia1:itrx;""«s"ubmitted by the 81-110 pi;=.rei.2.ent 14 and ﬁiaii impiement _. ., the recommendation unless the Registrar ﬁnds . t;'ruat i:'ne~ or the Corrective action are ' by any gross or .i.!.1.;-i-g.......==-my er * A' xx xx xx xx."

" " AA The is also empowered to reject the ﬁndings and ._"¥evo.»,:'mme11datio11s andhe shall also return the enthe to the Sexu,a; 1-Iar';a.se.m....t Inga;-'5' Ce-'-*-'t*uee

-Iﬁlullll _I_"(_u!' gvnnnnnirlnu-at-In.-. -A-1- -- ~' ..-.....,.\....m..uu or i'i.i1'uJf:T inqmry on any aspect // ' ' Registrar. It its edge e i In tact, regulation lug; would. e-.1 setting down in i_:_h_e re9._..... for H-mm it mm' on be said that as the Enquiry Committee there is authority. Indeed the J sacrosanct and the some by auutzpt the ﬁnanci-

..,....., m- to n:-jeet back for tieeh enquiry. aggrieved party is leit wii;h itio conectneas of the Indeed, the is not the It is at-u'wﬁs o,--at fer we trtegtett-»at+ of the Enquiry Committee to whetn tum shall be the ma] authority saw! é contemplate copies of dﬁiwm * """"""" ,......-....m.s of munsueea he " . avaiiabie for perusal to a. party concerned with such T deposiﬂon on nequeet. In fact the otnector in his wisdom can take a ttnet decision which will be in nature of moulding the recommendation oi' die Qommittt-.e M M ........ w '/ . ta

-.-nu-_ Faess-.id an ppc mt'! to

29. In so far as appoﬂihjitgjt of to represent 11;: that th complains? and -- pctiiziatncr and his witnesses institution of law and it :3' moo as to what is In fact, a perusal of the K .' __ _. me-...c 9:.-ailabh svo-.:..'d diacdﬁ In fact permission was given ' ﬁgs to take assistance offcllow student. In so " A as .ﬁ}1::V.inclusioa1 of Ms. Geeta Devi on the t_hs.I.:

.11ei ':1'.|...t [D 1: i.....-.:pcn..-.:.*1t person and we tz'ii'LiiiiiT)i' i' iiistﬁi" 1

" _ pan, is axso untonabie for the reasons already stated 1%,,»

30. Mr. S.v.'i.ran-. ;"1{'Il-F513, 1--«re-e. ai"J'pca1'n1g""" ~ for the petitioner sum "ts that itself is unconstitutional having regret to and also that there is a eiessj eeeeesa~ of"

uauitiiﬂtvll natural justice, in as .t_tie._';.arM--iiiv1.g ¢_';'IlItninnti"1_1a in H ............. .5 .. t...e ,~y"GF|C1i§31;'3"l.i.'~6f"'ﬁTlE cannot be accepted. To my so far as it relates to questtordhg and conduct of the 7 enqu1rygati_hieiw- in as much as, neither the "norV_the igiow as to 1.-:1"-.9.-.t is in stow fair: t.'iei't;.V.' 1'' 'd' 11- 1B..r|6,_€i'§-l:i{'Jt true that ﬁnding on the inetdeht i place on 27.3.2004 at this stage he eitim-'r--«"det1'imental to the interest of the the petitioner. Indeed, as submitted by leacriteeiil senior oothteei e;r.spee_ri..r-.g tor the r-Mm'-'at .I \JI'l}lIlIuKaI-\l'tI.

. .3'...

""153 fie f.-."1"1Qt.h.| _y -mpieted and the enquiry report is not 5 submitted to the Registmr having regard to the interim . ot~der granted by this court on 6.5.2005. In fact this is a case where the petitioner is putting the cart betbrc the horse. before the

-..mm....itt.-..-: has gem its "-*'-'r' 'M [I usyu Luis /,% I"

ht.-I.s ,msumerJ. that it is iikeiy to go ""-" "

is vioiation of principles of natural justice--A4':en¢:i such by itself is unconstitut.iorml.---in submitted by the Committee Vitiﬁelfxis eonci~ is V I ﬁnal. But however is to ii'-legstrar and th- ﬁne. ﬁxer to be

31. In as are cited at the Bar by where the enquiry is conipieted; of the er.q:.:i:'_'y' cow"-ts irregtxiaﬂiies in the conduct of the liiut in the present case we have yet has not seen the light of the day to the interim order obtained by :.h_a,e ii his 1eqz.I......-.

t ~ "if Consequently. I am ofthe View that the Iﬁtition does it __'?not merit consideration.

33. Hence the ibllowhig order is passed:

'IV a.) _.....!...__.g:.-A t... the mnS...t'.'l...€.'I'.'.--.'.'. -.'.e..!'.s',«i';;3wr_?{ the Codéiao Combat Sexual Harassment Fm: same cannot be struck down of its provisions;

compietion of the cnquii'y.§' qn grounds raised, stands _ _V _ _ It i§s"of§c1i:*!irS:j to challenge/qucstiqn the report __-g _..l.' LI. _ to this writ petition while %% 1 thé'v*a.=}iciity of the Code and it is open for the V raise the said oomacnlzionl before the ' a15:)ro_priﬁic;aut11ority. " -hands rjeeteﬁ m'x:'."iiiﬁghr w"i"t'n the above " 'T V' V .§1$§mvaﬁons.

wt _ ,____..----j

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court