Sexual harassment at work place

No. CHQ/AIAIPASP/MISC/MAH-KNK / 2016                        Dated :      13/7/2016

To,

The Chief Postmaster General,

Maharashtra Circle,

Mumbai – 400001.

Subject: Sexual harassment at work place  …. .case of Shri K. N. Bawankule, ASP, Nagpur MFL Division.

Ref.       : CO Mumbai Memo No.  Vig/3-4/2014 dated 27.11.2014 and 18.11.2015.

Respected Sir,

          IP/ASP Association would like to request you to kindly refer above cited memos on the subject. The following few lines are brought to your kind notice for sympathetic consideration and issue of suitable orders thereon:

1.  That a complaint of sexual harassment at work place was lodged by Ms. Varsha Lahane, PA, Paratwada HO under Amravati Division against Shri K N Bawankule when he was working as the Offtg. SPOs, Amravati Division.

2. That a Circle Complaint Committee established for inquiring into such complaints processed enquiry into the above complaint.

3.  That under the proviso below Rule 14(2) of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, such committee is deemed to be the inquiring authority appointed by the Disciplinary Authority for the purpose of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 and the complaint committe9e is to do enquiry as far as  practicable  in accordance with the procedure laid down in these rules.

4.  That the above committee submitted its report on 28.08.2014 in which charges leveled against Shri Bawankule were found proved, though there was no any documentary proof. Charges  were proved only on hearsay of some witnesses and no proper opportunity was made available to Shri Bawankule for his defence including cross examination of the witnesses as required under article 311 (2) of the Constitution.

5.  That after receipt of the report of the complaint committee, the disciplinary authority, taking required action under Rule 15 (2) of the CCS (CCA), Rules, 1965 issued a memorandum vide his no. Vig/3-4/2014 dated 27.11.2014 enclosing enquiry report of the committee and asked the official to make any representation or submission thereon and tentative decision of the disciplinary authority in agreeing with the findings. It was also mentioned in the last para of the memo that the representation made, if any, will be taken into the consideration before taking a final decision.

6.  That in the above memo in para 2, it was clearly mentioned that the disciplinary proceedings under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 was deemed to have been initiated against the official.  

7.  That in the above memo in para 3, it was also clearly mentioned that under proviso below Rule 14 (2) of CCS (CCA), Rules, 1965, the Circle Complaint Committee processed enquiries into the above complaint.

8. That a bit surprising that the case is unnecessarily reserved lingering without any valid reason. The official has received an order dated 18.11.2015 vide CO Memo no. Vig/3-4/2014 in which it was mentioned that inquiry under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA), Rules, 1965 was initiated against him vide memo no. Vig/3-4/2014 dated 27.11.2014 and Circle Compliant Committee made preliminary investigation and submitted report on 28.08.2014.

9. That it seems that without going through the memorandum dated 27.11.2014, the order dated 18.11.2015 was issued because vide memo dated 27.11.2014, inquiry was not initiated against official rather action was taken under Rule 15 (2) of the CCS (CCA), Rules, 1965, i.e. action was taken on inquiry report of the complaint committee.

10.That prior to the order dated 18.11.2015, it was not mentioned anywhere that the Circle Complaint Committee will make preliminary investigation. It was also not mentioned in any rule. When in para 3 of the memorandum dated 27.11.2014 it was also clearly mentioned that under proviso below Rule 14 (2) of CCS (CCA), Rules, 1965, the Circle Complaint Committee processed enquiries into the above complaint then question of inquiry by another inquiring authority does not arise at all.

11. That in para 2 of the order dated 18.11.2015, it is clearly mentioned that findings of the Committee were delivered to official on 27.11.2014 to submit representation and official had submitted his representation dated 05.01.2015.

12. That in this way order dated 18.11.2015 is just another order vide which again an inquiry authority has been appointed to inquire into the complaint, which has already been inquired by the same committee. Thus, it is totally irregular, illegal and against the rules and instruction of the department on the subject.

13. That after taking action under Rule 15(2) of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 as mentioned above, official’s case was to be finalized by the disciplinary authority under Rule 15(3) or 15(4) of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 but instead of this, another I.O. has been appointed to enquire into the complaint.

14.That even if the enquiry report of the Circle Complaint Committee is treated as preliminary investigation report though it is against the rules, even then the report and members of the committee will become evidence and witnesses and they cannot hold enquiry themselves.

15.That the official is due for regular promotion to PS Gr B cadre and had already lost adhoc promotion for last more than two years due to above complaint which is totally fabricated one for which inquiry was done only on hearsay and not on the basis of any documentary proof. The official has rendered 24 years of unblemished service in Inspector cadre with his hard work.  

16.That when the action was taken under Rule 15 (2) of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 vide memorandum dated 27.11.2014, official had submitted his representation dated 05.01.2015. The case has to be decided by the disciplinary authority on the basis of representation received from official but after about 11 months again another I.O. has been appointed to enquire into the complaint which is seems to be against the rules.

In view of the above lines, it is earnestly requested your kind honour to consider above mentioned points conscientiously and judiciously as per rules and issue cancellation order of above captioned memos immediately. The official has already suffered a lot which was not less than any punishment and any further unlawful delay will only affect his future also.

Hoping for a positive action.

Yours sincerely,

   Sd/-  

(Vilas Ingale)

General Secretary