The Manager Vs Manjesh J.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

MONDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF AUGUST 2016/31ST SRAVANA, 1938

¶5

RP.No. 673 of 2016

¶6

¶7

REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/RESPONDENTS 3 & 4 :

¶8

1. THE MANAGER,KRKPM BHS & VHSS, KADAMPANAD SOUTH P O, PATHANAMTHITTA-691553.

¶9

2. P SREELEKSHMI,THE MANAGER, KRKPM BHS & VHSS, KADAMPANAD SOUTH P O,PATHANAMTHITTA-691553.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.JOHN JOSEPH VETTIKAD

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1,2,5,6:

¶12

1. MANJESH J., AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.JAYAKUMAR UNNITHAN, HSA(SOCIAL SCIENCE),KRKPM BHS & VHSS, KADAMPANAD SOUTH P O, PATHANAMTHITTA 691533, RESIDING AT CHENNAMPALLIL HOUSE, CHENNAMPALLIL, ADOOR P O,PATHANAMTHITTA-691523.

¶13

2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KOTTARAKKARA-691506.

¶14

3. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, SASTHAMCOTTA-690521.

¶15

4. THE HEADMISTRESS, KRKPM BHS & VHSS, KADAMPANAD SOUTH P O, PATHANAMTHITTA 691553.

¶16

5. THE PRESIDING OFFICER, INTERNAL CAMPLAINS COMMITTEE, AGAINST SEXUAL HARASSMENT OF WOMEN AT WORKPLACE, KRKPM BHS & VHSS, KADAMPANAD SOUTH P O, PATHANAMTHITTA - 691533.

¶17

R1 BY SRI.M.T.SURESHKUMAR

¶18

R2,3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.ARUNKUMAR M.R.KARANAVER

¶19

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22-08-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

PJ

¶21

RP.No. 673 of 2016

¶22

APPENDIX

¶23

PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES

¶24

ANNEXURE A : A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14/7/16 SENT BY THE REVISION PETITIONER TO THE R1. ANNEXURE B: A TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DATED 20/7/16 SENT BY HE R1.

¶25

RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURE

¶26

NIL. / TRUE COPY / P.S. TO JUDGE

PJ

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

R.P.No.673 Of 2016

in W.P(C).No.20201 of 2016

¶31

Dated this the 22nd day of August, 2016.

¶32

W.P(C).No.20201/2016 from which the instant Review Petition arises was instituted by the Writ Petitioner to secure a declaration that the Internal Complaints Committee constituted in the Aided School concerned (of which the said petitioner is a teacher) as to the provisions of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, is bad in the eye of law and that the same is non est, etc. This Court at the admission stage had disposed of the Writ Petition as per the impugned judgment dated 14.6.2016 by directing the District Educational Officer, Kollam, to look into the grievance raised by the petitioner and to pass orders thereon in accordance with law. At that point of time the Writ Petition was disposed of without issuing notice to the respondent-Manager therein. Now the manager of the above mentioned Aided School concerned has filed the instant Review Petition stating that even as on the date on

¶33

::2::

¶34

R.P.No.673 Of 2016

¶35

which the impugned judgment was rendered on 14.6.2016, the term of office of the said Internal Complaints Committee as constituted by Ext.P-9 had already expired inasmuch as it has been made explicitly clear in Ext.P-9 itself that the term for which the said Committee was constituted is for a period of 3 years from 1.6.2013 up to 31.5.2016. It is now further pointed out by the Review Petitioner that a new Committee has been constituted as per Anx.A-1 order No.KRKPM/SH/ 2/2016 dated 1.6.2016 by which a new Internal Complaints Committee has been constituted for the next 3 years from 1.6.2016 up to 31.5.2019. It is further pointed out by Sri.John Joseph Vettikkad, learned counsel for the review petitioner (Manager of the Aided School) that the said Committee constituted as per Anx.A proceedings dated 1.6.2016 also has a nominee in terms of Sec.4(2)(c) of the above said Act which mandates that one member from amongst nonGovernmental organisations or associations committed to the cause of women or a person familiar with the issues relating to sexual harassment, has also included therein.

¶36

Heard Sri.John Joseph Vettikkad, learned counsel appearing for the review petitioner, Sri.M.T.Suresh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent herein/writ petitioner and the learned

¶37

::3::

¶38

R.P.No.673 Of 2016

¶39

Government Pleader appearing for official respondents 2 & 3 herein. Going by the nature of the allegations raised in this case, there is no necessity to issue notice to the 4th and 5th respondents and hence notice

¶40

to those parties are dispensed with.

¶41

Anx.A-1 proceedings dated 1.6.2016 reads as follows:

¶42

“PROCEEDINGS OF THE MANAGER, KRKPM BHS & VHSS, KADAMBANAD SOUTH .

¶43

(P.O), PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 691 553

¶44

Sub:Sexual Harassment of women at work place (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 - Internal Complaints Committee-KRKPM BHS & VHSS, Kadambanad South for the period from 1/06/2016 to 31/05/2019 - Constituted - Orders issued.

¶45

Ref:-1. Section 4(1) of the Sexual Harassment of women at Work place (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013.

¶46

Proceedings Order No.KRKPM/SH/1/2013 dated 01.06.2013 of The Manager KRKPMBHS& VHSS Kadampanad.

¶47

ORDER NO.KRKPM/SH/2/2016 dated 01.06.2016

¶48

In exercise of the powers conferred on the undersigned under Section 4(1) of the Act referred to (1) above, an Internal Complaints Committee was constituted as per Proceedings Order 2nd cited in KRKPM BHS and VHSS, Kadambanad South for a period of three years from 1/06/2013 to 31/05/2016 to deal with the complaints on sexual harassment. As the tenure of the internal complaints committee constituted as per the reference 2nd cited at KRKPM BHS and VHSS, Kadambanad South is over by the afternoon of 31st May 2016 the Internal complaints Committee has to be reconstituted from 1st June 2016 for period of three years from 1st June 2016 to 31st May 2019 as mandated in the enactment referred to (1) above.

¶49

Accordingly the Internal Complaints Committee at KRKPM BHS and VHSS, Kadambanad South, Pathanamthitta district is reconstituted with the Presiding Officer and Members, mentioned below, respectively to look into and proceed on the complaints filed by the women members on staff of the school against sexual harassment or incidents that of similar in nature.

¶50

Smt.Mony John, Senior Assistant (HSA Physical Science) - Presiding Officer.

¶51

Smt.Sujatha. R (HSA-Maths) - Member 3. Sri.Anilkumar.P.G. (Physical Education Teacher) -Member 4. S.Ushakumari, -Member Kattur Veedu, Kadampanad South Kadampanad, Member, Kudumbashree Unit, Kadampanad (Representative of NGO)

¶52

::4::

¶53

R.P.No.673 Of 2016

¶54

The Presiding Officer and other three Members of the Internal Complaints Committee shall hold the office for a period of three years from 1st June, 2016 to 31st May, 2019. The Presiding Officer will convene the meeting of the committee as and when required and the proceedings thereon will be recorded as minutes of the committee and that will be made available to the undersigned for perusal and further action as provided in the above Act and the Rules.

¶55

Sd/Manager KRKPM BHS & VHSS, KADAMPANAD KADAMBANAD SOUTH (P.O), PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 691 553”

¶56

As the term of office of Ext.P-9 Committee had already expired on 3.5.2016, and as a new Committee as per Anx.A-1 has already been constituted, the main relief sought in the Writ Petition had already become infructuous when the Writ Petition was filed before this Court on 13.6.2016. As this crucial fact relating to Ext.P-9 was not pointed out to the attention of this Court by any of the parties concerned at the time of rendering of the judgment on 14.6.2016, it is only to be held that non-consideration of that crucial aspect is an error apparent on the face on record and the impugned judgment is liable to be reviewed and recalled. Accordingly, it is so ordered.

¶57

It is further made clear that if the petitioner has got any grievance to the new Committee constituted as per Anx.A-1 proceedings or any other grievance, it is for him to work out

¶58

::5::

¶59

R.P.No.673 Of 2016

¶60

appropriate remedies in the manner known to law by approaching the competent authority concerned for taking steps for such redressal of grievances, if any.

¶61

With these observations and directions, the Review Petition stands allowed as indicated above.

¶62

ALEXANDER THOMAS, Judge.

¶63

Bkn/-

¶64

The word “Kollam” occurring in the 9^th line of first paragraph of the order dated 22/08/2016 in R.P.No.673/2016 in W.P.(C).No.20201/2016 is deleted and substituted as “Kottarakkara” and the date “3.5.2016” occurring in the 2^nd line of paragraph 3 at page 4 is deleted and substituted as “31.05.2016” as per order dated 09/09/2016 in I.A No.407/2016 in R.P.No.673/2016.

¶65

Registrar (Judicial)

¶66

Sd/-

The Manager v. Manjesh J.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Manager v. Manjesh J.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Babu Mathew Vs the Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd.

Thulasibhai @ Thulasi Vs the Village Officer

George Varghese Vs Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd.

Dr.Vinovin V.A Vs Sree Sankaracharya University

Kailasnadh N.M. Vs the State Bank of Travancore

Sidhic N.M. Vs Ksfe Limited