CHENNAI: Ending a protracted legal battle that lasted for more than two decades, the Madras High Court declared that a woman employee of the Railway Employees' Cooperative Society suffered sexual harassment at her workplace due to the inaction of the management.
The woman employee had joined the society in 1994. In 1998, J Nagakesari, an assistant secretary of the society, started sexually harassing her. Initially, she feared lodging a formal complaint against the man due to his authority. Finally, she gathered courage and made an oral complaint to the chairman of the society. Though actions were initiated against Nagakesari, they were revoked and he was reinstated with all administrative powers.
Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy held that the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the woman were victimisation and a fall out of her decision to question the authorities over the sexual harassment she faced
Aggrieved by the continuous humiliation and harassment, the woman filed complaints with the National Commission for Women (NCW), the State Commission for Women, the Human Rights Commission, the police, and the Chief Minister's Cell.
The then national commission, in which Nirmala Sitharaman (presently Union Finance Minister) was a member, concluded that the woman was subjected to sexual harassment by Nagakesari and recommended disciplinary proceedings against him, including suspension from service.
However, the woman’s ordeal did not end there; instead it only worsened, as multiple charge memos were issued against the woman staffer subsequently and she was finally placed under suspension in 2004. In this situation, the woman employee approached the High Court seeking a direction to grant her rightful retirement benefits and to pay the arrears due from the period of suspension till date.
When the case came up for hearing before Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy, the judge held that the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the employee were victimisation and a fall out of her decision to question the authorities over the sexual harassment she faced at work.
The court declared that the charge memos issued in 2003 and 2004 were deemed to be lapsed and her suspension from March 12, 2004, must be treated appropriately. The judge then directed that she should be deemed retired from May 31, 2023, with all retirement benefits and six per cent interest should be paid within eight weeks.