Vishaka and others V. State of Rajasthan and others.

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Supreme Court of IndiaRecord of ProceedingsWrit Petition (Crl.) No. 173-177/1999Medha Kotwal Lele & ors.VersusUOI & Ors.Petitioner(s)Respondent(s)(with appln(s) for permission and with office report)With T.C. (C) No. 21/2001(Kerala Sthreevedi & Anr. Vs. State of Kerala & Ors.)Date : 26. 4. 2004. This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM:Hon’ble Mr. Justice S. Rajendra BabuHon’ble Mr. Justice K.G. BalakrishnanHon’ble Mr. Justice G. P. MathurMr. Soli J. Sorabjee, Attorney General for India & OthersUPON hearing counsel the Court made the following.ORDERSeveral petitions had been filed before this Court by Women Organisations andon the basis of the note prepared by the Registrar General that in respect of sexualharassment cases the Complaints Committees were not formed in accordance withthe guidelines issued by this Court in Vishaka Vs. State of Rajasthan (1997 (6) SCC241 and that these petitions fell under clause (6) of the PIL Guidelines given by thisCourt i.e. “Atrocities on Women” and in any event the Guidelines set out in Vishakawere not being followed. Thereupon, this Court treated the petitions as writ petitionsfiled in public interest.Notice had been issued to several parties including the Governments concernedand on getting appropriate responses from them and now after hearing learnedAttorney General for UOI and learned counsel, we direct as followed:28
“Complaints Committee as envisaged by the Supreme Court in its judgementin Vishaka’s Case, 1997 (6) SCC 241 at 253, will be deemed to be an inquiryauthority for the purposes of Central Civil Services (conduct) Rules, 1964 (hereinaftercalled CCS Rules) and the report of the complaint Committee shall be deemed to bean inquiry report under the CCS rules. Thereafter the disciplinary authority will act onthe report in accordance with the rules.”Similar amendments shall also be carried out in The Industrial Employment(Standing Orders) Rules.29
Page 1: Vishaka and others V. State of Raja
Page 5: equirement as logical concomitant o
Page 12 and 13: Apparel Export Promotion Council v.
Page 14: 6. The Enquiry Officer concluded th
Page 18 and 19: 5. That the respondent tried to sit
Page 20 and 21: 20. After a detailed review of the
Page 22 and 23: y the Division Bench, itself demons
Page 24 and 25: the respondent caused sexual harass
Page 26 and 27: international instruments. The Cour
Page 30 and 31: Government of IndiaMinistry of Pers
Page 32 and 33: Explanation :- Where any comment, a
Page 34 and 35: etain the original complaint with h
Page 36 and 37: SEXUAL HARASSMENTAT WORK PLACENATIO
Page 38 and 39: FOREWORDThe Supreme Court of India

Vishaka and others V. State of Rajasthan and others.

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?