Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sri Chethan J S, an Assistant Engineer (Electrical) with the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the report dated 26.06.2025 passed by respondent No. 4, the Local Complaint Redressal Committee, Hassan District. The petitioner sought to call for records and quash the impugned report. At the outset, the learned Additional Government Advocate (AGA) raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the writ petition, arguing that the petitioner had an alternative remedy of appeal under Section 18 of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013. The court considered this objection and noted that the impugned order was passed by the Local Complaint Redressal Committee under the said Act. The court held that the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy of appeal under Section 18 of the Act, and therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable. The court dismissed the writ petition, granting the petitioner liberty to file an appeal before the appropriate authority within a period of four weeks from the date of the order. The court clarified that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Alternative Remedy - Maintainability - The petitioner challenged a report of the Local Complaint Redressal Committee under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013. The court held that since an efficacious alternative remedy of appeal under Section 18 of the Act is available, the writ petition is not maintainable. The court dismissed the petition with liberty to file an appeal. (Para 3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the writ petition challenging the order of the Local Complaint Redressal Committee is maintainable when an alternative remedy of appeal is available under Section 18 of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. The petitioner is at liberty to file an appeal before the appropriate authority under Section 18 of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 within four weeks from the date of the order. The court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
Law Points
- Alternative remedy
- maintainability of writ petition
- availability of appeal under Section 18 of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act
- 2013
