K.M. BALASUBRAMANYA PRASAD S/O LATE K.B. MUNINANJAPPA Vs. THE PRESIDENT DISTRICT LEVEL SEXUAL HARASSMENT REDRESSAL COMMITTEE CUM SENIOR SURGEON GOVT. MEGON HOSPITAL AND SMT. NIRMALA W/O LATE NAGARAJ P. GROUP-D EMPLOYEE OFFICE OF CONSERVATOR OF F

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner has sought for quashing the notice vide Annexure -'A' dated 21.7.2009 by which the Petitioner is directed to file his statement of objections and face enquiry before the 1st Respondent. The said notice is issued based on the complaint lodged by Respondent No. 2.

(2.) THE records reveal that the 2nd Respondent is Group -D employee working in the office of Conservator of Forests. In the year 2007, the Petitioner as well as 2nd Respondent were working in the same office at the same place in different capacities. The 2nd Respondent lodged a complaint before the Conservator of Forests, Shimoga, making certain allegations against the Petitioner. She has also lodged the information before the Mahila Police Station, Kote Circle, Shimoga, alleging offences punishable under Sections 354, 509 of IPC. Pursuant to the said complaint lodged by the 2nd Respondent before the Conservator of Forests, the case is referred to 1st Respondent for enquiry. The 1st Respondent consequently has issued a notice vide Annexure -'A', calling upon the Petitioner to appear for enquiry. The Petitioner has filed his statement of objections before the Conservator of Forests as per Annexure -'C'. However, no enquiry is held against the Petitioner as on this day in view of the interim order granted by this Court.

(3.) THOUGH the Petitioner has sought for quashing the proceedings before the 1st Respondent, this Court does not entertain such prayer of quashing the proceedings, inasmuch as, the 1st Respondent may have to enquire about the complaint. The 1st Respondent committee is constituted pursuant to the order passed by the Supreme Court in Application No. 666 -70/1992, disposed of on 13.8.1997. Having regard to the material found in the complaint and the statement of objections filed by the Petitioner, in my considered opinion, interest, of justice will be met if the enquiry proceeds. If the enquiry is held, the truth will come out and the Petitioner may prove his innocence also.