Sexual Harassment at Work: MP High Court directs Medanta hospital to pay 25 lakh Compensation
Indore: Holding Medanta Hospital, Indore guilty of not addressing a female employee's case of sexual harassment, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has directed the hospital to pay a compensation of Rs 25 lakh to the victim.  The court further directed the hospital to pay a penalty of Rs 50,000 on account of not having a mandatory Internal Complaints Committee under the law of the land
The court cautioned the Managing Director of the hospital to be more sensitive and careful while dealing with such matters. "Under the circumstances, it is imperative to strike a note of caution for the Managing Director of the Hospital to be sensitive and extra careful in dealing with pains and sufferings of the women employees at the workplace to avoid recurrence of such unfortunate incidences," the court observed.
The observations of the court,came in response to a petition filed by Global Health Pvt Ltd, which challenged the decisions of the Local Committee for enquiry, Indore District and HC in the matter.
The matter concerned one of the employees in the marketing department of the hospital who alleged against the Medical Superintendent of the hospital. She further alleged that under such insecure and helpless situation, she looked upon superiors to come to her rescue but all turned deaf ears and shown cold shoulders
During this period, her probation at the hospital was extended, and in 2016 she was terminated
In 2016, she submitted a complaint alleging harassment at workplace to the Women Welfare Section of Ministry of Women & Child Development, Government of India and the same was forwarded under covering letter  the Principal Secretary, Department of Women and Child Development Government of Madhya Pradesh. In turn, the complaint was forwarded to the Chief Executive Officer, District Indore, Indore u and the same was made over to the Local Committee for enquiry.
On 06/10/2016, it was considered apposite to ascertain the existence of internal complaints committee (to be constituted under section 4 of the Act, 2013) at the workplace of the complainant, i.e., in the establishment of Hospital and if the said committee existed, let the complaint be examined and enquired.
The report suggested that upon visit of the representative of the Local Committee to the Hospital and enquiry made from employees available, it was found that no such internal complaints committee is in existence. There was no notice board to that effect as well.
The committee then issued a notice to HR of the hospital, who in the reply reiterated existence of the internal complaints committee. However, the response denied to have received any compliant from the complainant and, therefore, the internal complaints committee had no occasion to look into the complaint.
The hospital also filed a reply in between that while both the parties were no longer in the employment, it would conduct enquiry and submit report. However, no report was submitted the committee later observed
The Local Committee Indore district continued with their enquiry in the matter, including going through response of the MS, and calling him to record his statement. Despite three opportunities, the Medical Superintendent did not turn up to record his statement, the committee noted. Thereafter, the Committee submitted the report on 18/08/2017.
Challenging the report, the Hospital reached the court.
Going through the entire submissions of the hospital, the committee, the court in detailed went through the various definitions of what constitutes as sexual harassment
The court then noted
The court also doubted about the hospital having an internal complaints committee
The court then passed the following order
Section 4(1) of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Po·evention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 mandates for every organisation that every employer of a workplace shall, by an order in writing, constitute a Committee to be known as the " lntcrnal Complaints Committee"
The court cautioned the Managing Director of the hospital to be more sensitive and careful while dealing with such matters. "Under the circumstances, it is imperative to strike a note of caution for the Managing Director of the Hospital to be sensitive and extra careful in dealing with pains and sufferings of the women employees at the workplace to avoid recurrence of such unfortunate incidences," the court observed.
The observations of the court,came in response to a petition filed by Global Health Pvt Ltd, which challenged the decisions of the Local Committee for enquiry, Indore District and HC in the matter.
The matter concerned one of the employees in the marketing department of the hospital who alleged against the Medical Superintendent of the hospital. She further alleged that under such insecure and helpless situation, she looked upon superiors to come to her rescue but all turned deaf ears and shown cold shoulders
During this period, her probation at the hospital was extended, and in 2016 she was terminated
In 2016, she submitted a complaint alleging harassment at workplace to the Women Welfare Section of Ministry of Women & Child Development, Government of India and the same was forwarded under covering letter  the Principal Secretary, Department of Women and Child Development Government of Madhya Pradesh. In turn, the complaint was forwarded to the Chief Executive Officer, District Indore, Indore u and the same was made over to the Local Committee for enquiry.
On 06/10/2016, it was considered apposite to ascertain the existence of internal complaints committee (to be constituted under section 4 of the Act, 2013) at the workplace of the complainant, i.e., in the establishment of Hospital and if the said committee existed, let the complaint be examined and enquired.
The report suggested that upon visit of the representative of the Local Committee to the Hospital and enquiry made from employees available, it was found that no such internal complaints committee is in existence. There was no notice board to that effect as well.
The committee then issued a notice to HR of the hospital, who in the reply reiterated existence of the internal complaints committee. However, the response denied to have received any compliant from the complainant and, therefore, the internal complaints committee had no occasion to look into the complaint.
The hospital also filed a reply in between that while both the parties were no longer in the employment, it would conduct enquiry and submit report. However, no report was submitted the committee later observed
The Local Committee Indore district continued with their enquiry in the matter, including going through response of the MS, and calling him to record his statement. Despite three opportunities, the Medical Superintendent did not turn up to record his statement, the committee noted. Thereafter, the Committee submitted the report on 18/08/2017.
Challenging the report, the Hospital reached the court.
Going through the entire submissions of the hospital, the committee, the court in detailed went through the various definitions of what constitutes as sexual harassment
The court then noted
From the deliberations recorded in the course of enquiry before the Local Committee, it is clear that the Medical Superintendent did not cooperate in the enquiry and the representative of the Hospital after filing the aforesaid referred scanty replies dated 21/11/2016 whereunder it is mentioned that internal complaints committee ('ICC') is in existence in the Hospital...whereunder it is mentioned that the complaint dated 18/03/2016 was received, however, the complainant did not approach the Employee Grievance Committee but, the Hospital intended to refer the complaint to the said Committee for an enquiry and once the enquiry was conducted, the detailed report should be submitted before the Local Committee. No enquiry report is submitted. No other material was placed on record before the Local Committee. They did not cooperate or sought permission for cross-examination of the complainant at any point of time. No evidence was led in the context of emails on record, particularly email dated 18/02/2016 (Annexure P/6) referred above. Under the circumstances, no complaint of violation of principles of natural justice at the instance of Hospital and/or Medical Superintendent can be entertained. Moreover, curiously enough, the petitioners have not impleaded as party/respondent the Medical Superintendent in two writ petitions. That also reinforce the adverse inference drawn by the Local Committee against the Hospital.
The court also doubted about the hospital having an internal complaints committee
As regards constitution and existence of internal complaints committee referable to Annexure P/13 and annual reports dated 22/01/2016 & 18/01/2017 (Annexure P/20) for the years 2015 and 2016; suffice it to say during the visit of representative of the Local Committee noted that no such information was supplied
..As such, the existence of the internal complaints committee itself is doubtful at the Hospital. Even otherwise, if the compliant was referred, the same would be of no use since the person against whom acquisitions have been made, i.e., Medical Superintendent was allegedly a member of such committee. Under the circumstances, Annexure P/20 (pages 111 & 113) appears to be a paper formality not in existence at the Hospital. In the obtaining facts and circumstance, no exception to the conclusion of the Local Committee in that behalf is warranted....
The court then passed the following order
(i) the respondent No.3/ complainant (victim) is held entitled for compensation to the tune of Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees twenty five lakhs only) for the pain & suffering, loss of reputation, emotional distress and loss of salary of eighteen months for no fault on her part resulting into deprivation of right to live with dignity;
(ii) she is entitled for EPF and other monetary dues (if still not paid);
(iii) the respondent No.3/complainant be issued character and experience certificate during the period she was in employment without attaching any stigma by the competent authority of Hospital;
(iv) the respondent No.3 / complainant is directed to furnish the details of savings bank account to the Hospital within two weeks from today for necessary compliance (if not already with the Hospital);
(v) the Hospital is directed to deposit the amount in the savings bank account of respondent No.3 / complainant within eight weeks positively; failing which the same shall attract interest at the rate of 09% (nine) per annum from today.
(vi) the Hospital is directed to pay penalty of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) (if not already paid) in terms of section 26 of the Act, 2013 due to non-existence of internal complaints committee at the relevant point of time; within a period of four weeks from today failing which the proceedings in accordance with law be initiated by the respondent No.1 against the Hospital;
(vii) the proposed action under sections 499 and 500 IPC against the petitioners in W.P.No.22314/2017 is quashed.
Section 4(1) of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Po·evention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 mandates for every organisation that every employer of a workplace shall, by an order in writing, constitute a Committee to be known as the " lntcrnal Complaints Committee"
Next Story