Sikkim High Court: Bhaskar Raj Pradhan, J.has framed an eminent question for determination which will have an impact on the dispensation of justice to complainants under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (the “POSH Act”).
The High Court will determine whether the broad interpretation of the “workplace” under Section 2(o)(vi) of the POSH Act would bring within its ambit attending a private marriage function in a private hotel.
The applicant sought direction upon the respondents not to take any step on the basis of the show-cause notice dated 10-06-2019 and the order of termination pursuant to the report of the respondent 4.
Petitioner sought to allow him to join the post of a professor of the Department of Mass Communication, appoint him as the Head of the Department and pay his regular salary including his arrears.
Kalol Basu, Counsel represented the applicant and Karma Thinlay Namgyal, Senior Advocate assisted by K.T. Gyatso, on behalf of the respondents.
Applicant’s counsel urged that the entire enquiry conducted by respondent 4 was without jurisdiction as the alleged incident of sexual harassment purportedly had taken place at a hotel during a marriage function and the same does not fall within the definition of “workplace” as per the existing law.
Bench stated that admittedly the alleged incident took place at a marriage function in a private hotel.
Section 2(o) of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 defines the workplace.
In view of the said definition of “workplace”, it seems that the petitioner does have a strong arguable point on the jurisdiction or the lack of it.
Whether the broad interpretation of “workplace” would bring within its ambit attending a private marriage function in a private hotel, is a question which may have to be examined.
In the stated circumstances, High Court is of the considered view that during the pendency of the writ petition before this court, the respondents 1 to 3 should not give any further effect to the termination order dated 28-06-2019.
The application was disposed of in the above view. [Silajit Guha v. Sikkim University, 2020 SCC OnLine Sikk 99, decided on 20-08-2020]