NDLI: Dr. P. S. Malik Vs. High Court of Delhi & Anr.

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Constitution of India Arts.233 and 235Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace ss.11 13 and 18
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Constitution of India
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3
Case Type	Writ Petition
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Others
Headnote	Constitution of India – Arts.233 and 235 – Petitioner was working as Additional District Judge at Dwarka, New Delhi –Written complaints submitted against the petitioner, to the Chief Justice of the High Court of Delhi, by a lady Junior Judicial Assistant who worked as Ahlmad in the petitioner’s Court from 18.05.2015 to 18.05.2016 alleging sexual harassment at work place– On 13.07.2016, the petitioner was placed under suspension – Internal Complaints Committee constituted – Preliminary Report submitted to the Full Court of the High Court opining that disciplinary inquiry be held against the petitioner – Full Court resolved to hold the inquiry – Inquiry Report dated 09.03.2018 submitted by the Committee – Petitioner has filed the present writ petition inter alia submitting that there being an Inquiry Report by Internal Complaints Committee as envisaged by ss.11 and 13 of the 2013 Act, the High Court could not have decided to initiate the inquiry or suspend the petitioner – Held: Petitioner is member of Judicial Service for which disciplinary authority is the High Court – The word “control” occurring in Art.235 means not only the general superintendence of the working of the Courts but includes the disciplinary control of the judicial officers, i.e., the district judges and judges subordinate to him – High Court can initiate disciplinary proceedings against judicial officers – Power to suspend the judicial officer vests in the High Court– Under the 2013 Act, complaint mechanism and mechanism for constitution of the Internal Complaints Committee, mechanism to inquire the complaint, are all for protection of dignity and welfare of women at workplace – Provisions of ss.11, 13 in no manner affect the control of the High Court u/Art.235 with respect to judicial officers– Full Court of the High Court is in no manner precluded from initiating disciplinary inquiry against the petitioner and placing him under suspension on being satisfied that sufficient material existed – No error in the decision of the Full Court dated 13.07.2016 – Further, submission of the petitioner that due to non-supply of Preliminary Inquiry Report dated 05.11.2016, the proceedings have been vitiated, not accepted – Only limited issues as pressed by the petitioner have been considered – Disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner still underway – It is open for the petitioner to raise all pleas of facts and law before the appropriate authority – Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 – Chapters II, IV & V – ss.4, 11 and 13 – All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969 – r.8. Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 – ss.11, 13 and 18 – Complaint of sexual harassment at work place made against the petitioner, judicial officer in Delhi Higher Judicial Services, by an employee in his Court – Present writ petition filed by the petitioner inter alia submitting that copy of the Preliminary Inquiry Report not being supplied to him, he has been denied right to appeal – Held: Preliminary Inquiry Report dated 05.11.2016 did not contain any findings on allegations made against the petitioner – It only opined that inquiry should be held – Even u/s.11(1) in the second proviso, the only contemplation is to make available a copy of the findings – Thus, the report in which there are no findings, parties are not entitled to have the copy – Inquiry Report referred in s.13 is the Report which has been submitted by Internal Complaints Committee after completion of the inquiry – Inquiry Report by Internal Complaints Committee dated 09.03.2018 was admittedly supplied to the petitioner– Right of appeal given against the recommendation made u/s.13(2) or (3) are appealable u/s.18– Thus, the right of appeal is given to an aggrieved person only when report is submitted u/s.13 to the employer – No prejudice caused to the petitioner by nonsupply of Report dated 05.11.2016.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashok Bhushan
Neutral Citation	2019 INSC 936
Petitioner	Dr. P. S. Malik
Respondent	High Court Of Delhi & Anr.
SCR	[2019] 12 S.C.R. 957
Judgement Date	2019-08-21
Case Number	705

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Dr. P. S. Malik Vs. High Court of Delhi & Anr.

Please Log-in to view this content

Yatin Narendra Oza Vs. High Court of Gujarat

Dr. Rini Johar & Anr. Vs. State of M.p. & Ors.

The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace

Mahendra Lal Jaini Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh and Others

M. P. Sharma and Others Vs. Satish Chandra, District Magistrate, Delhi, and Others.

The Sexual Harassment at Workplace Act

Syed Qasim Razvi Vs. The State of Hyderabad and Others

The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013

The SEXUAL HARASSMENT OF WOMEN AT WORKPLACE (PREVENTION, PROHIBITlON AND REDRESSAL) ACT, 2013

Dr. P. S. Malik Vs. High Court of Delhi & Anr.

Dr. P. S. Malik Vs. High Court of Delhi & Anr.

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Yatin Narendra Oza Vs. High Court of Gujarat

Dr. Rini Johar & Anr. Vs. State of M.p. & Ors.

The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace

Mahendra Lal Jaini Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh and Others

M. P. Sharma and Others Vs. Satish Chandra, District Magistrate, Delhi, and Others.

The Sexual Harassment at Workplace Act

Syed Qasim Razvi Vs. The State of Hyderabad and Others

The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013

The SEXUAL HARASSMENT OF WOMEN AT WORKPLACE (PREVENTION, PROHIBITlON AND REDRESSAL) ACT, 2013

Dr. P. S. Malik Vs. High Court of Delhi & Anr.