SURESH BABU Vs. REGIONAL JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner was an employee in one of the establishments of the second respondent namely HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company Limited in the State. He was terminated from service in terms of Ext. P-1 order on the basis of the recommendation made by the Internal Committee constituted under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 ('the Act'). Aggrieved by the recommendation made by the Internal Committee under Section 13 of the Act, the petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 18 of the Act before the first respondent. Ext. P-3 is the appeal. The first respondent, however, informed the petitioner in terms of Ext. P-4 communication that the third respondent is the competent authority to entertain appeals preferred under Section 18 of the Act. According to the petitioner, the first respondent is the competent authority to deal with the appeals preferred under Section 18 of the Act. Hence this writ petition for appropriate reliefs.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader, the learned counsel for the second respondent and the learned Central Government Counsel.

(3.) Section 18 of the Act provides for an appeal against recommendations made by the Internal Committee constituted under the Act. Section 18 of the Act reads thus :