MATILDES LOBATO DE FARIA Vs. STATE OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. M. B. Da Costa, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P. Talaulikar, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 and 3.

(2.) By this petition, the petitioner has prayed inter alia for the direction to the respondents to constitute a committee in accordance with the judgment of the Supreme Court in (Vishaka Vs. State of Rajasthan), 1997 6 SCC 241 and for quashing and setting aside the inquiry report dated 30.11.2006 made by the Chairperson only instead of the entire committee. The facts in brief are that the petitioner alleged molestation and harassment while working as Junior Stenographer in the office of the Registrar of Co-operative Socieities. Her duties were assigned to the Administrative Tribunal. According to her, she suffered molestation and harassment in the hands of the Registrar who tried to grab the muster roll from her hands and in the process touched her sexually. This has been denied by respondent No. 4. According to the petitioner, the Tribunal did not pay any heed to her complaint. Hence, she moved the Registrar to forward her complaint to the President who in turn forwarded it to the committee. The committee after recording evidence however came to the conclusion that though the incident took place as alleged the petitioner has contributed to the incident by resisting the Registrar who tried to take the muster roll to which he was entitled. It is this decision which is challenged by the petitioner. At the outset, we note that the main ground for the challenge is that the inquiry report has not been made by a committee constituted by chairperson.

(3.) Mr. M.B. Da Costa, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner pointed out that the Government of Goa, Law Department, Panaji, has constituted a committee of five members by an order dated 6.1.2003 as follows : <p><table class = tablestyle width="74%" border="1" align="center" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="1" style=" font-family:Verdana"> <tr> <td width="9%"><div align="center"><strong>Sr. No.</strong></div></td> <td width="91%"><div align="center"><strong>Composition of Committee Work-place from where complaint may be received by respective Chairperson/Member of the Committee.</strong></div></td> </tr> <tr> <td><div align="center">1.</div></td> <td><div align="center">Smt. Shoba Dhumaskar, Public Prosecutor, Mapusa (Chairperson)<br> Directorate of Prosecution and all offices of public Prosecution Asst. Public Prosecutions.</div></td> </tr> <tr> <td><div align="center">2.</div></td> <td><div align="center">Smt. Smita Chand wani, Legal Supdt., Law Department (Member)<br> Legal section of Law Department</div></td> </tr> <tr> <td><div align="center">3.</div></td> <td><div align="center">Smt. Margaret Fernandes, Steno Grade-II, Law Department (Member)<br> Establishment section of Law Department</div></td> </tr> <tr> <td><div align="center">4.</div></td> <td><div align="center">Smt. Jai Gadekar, Registrar, Administrative Tribunal (Member)<br> Office of the Administrative Tribunal, Panaji</div></td> </tr> <tr> <td><div align="center">5.</div></td> <td><div align="center">Smt. Dominica e Souza U.D.C. Registration Department, (Member)<br> Office of District Registrar and all offices of Civil Registrar-cum-sub-Registrar</div></td> </tr> </table>