Delhi High Court Affirms Validity of Preliminary Inquiries

Factual Background

In a judgment dated January 21, 2019, the Delhi High Court, in the case of S.K. Tanwar v. Union of India, upheld the legitimacy of preliminary inquiries conducted by internal committees before initiating final inquiries. The case centred on a complaint of sexual harassment filed against Mr. S.K. Tanwar (“Petitioner”) by a female employee. In response to this complaint, the competent authority initiated a preliminary inquiry through the Internal Committee (“IC 1”). Subsequently, IC 1 submitted its preliminary report, which, based on initial inquiries, concluded that there were substantial grounds to proceed with a formal inquiry against the Petitioner. Building upon these preliminary findings, the competent authority constituted a new Internal Committee (“IC 2”) to conduct a comprehensive inquiry, as prescribed by Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1965 (“Rules”). IC 2 then proceeded to frame charges against the Petitioner, and the chargesheet was duly issued to him.

Summary of Proceedings

Upon receiving the chargesheet, the Petitioner approached the Central Administrative Tribunal (“Tribunal”) on two primary grounds:

1. The contention that IC 1 had already pronounced him guilty, rendering the formation of IC 2 unnecessary.
2. The argument that the preliminary report had unfairly prejudiced his interests, as it purportedly did not adhere to the principles of natural justice.

The Tribunal dismissed the Petitioner’s claims, affirming that the competent authorities possessed the discretion to directly conduct a final inquiry. However, they opted for a preliminary inquiry, during which neither the Petitioner nor witnesses were summoned. Importantly, the observations made during the preliminary inquiry were not considered binding, and the matter would be independently assessed on its merits before IC 2. Dissatisfied with the Tribunal’s decision, the Petitioner subsequently approached the Delhi High Court through the present petition.

Court’s Verdict

The Delhi High Court underscored that the sole purpose of the preliminary inquiry was to determine whether the allegations of sexual harassment warranted a more in-depth examination through a formal inquiry in line with the Rules. After a thorough review of the preliminary report, the competent authority concluded that it was appropriate to constitute IC 2. This second committee would meticulously investigate the allegations, afford the Petitioner an opportunity to make representations, and observe the principles of natural justice before preparing a final report.

During the proceedings, the respondent’s counsel pointed out that the Petitioner had not cooperated with IC 2 by failing to appear. The Court firmly emphasized that such non-cooperation would be detrimental to the Petitioner’s own interests, preventing him from seeking a reopening of the inquiry proceedings on these grounds at a later stage. Furthermore, the Court held that, even at the current stage, if the Petitioner is willing to participate and collaborate, he should be permitted to do so to eliminate any potential technical complications in the future.

Significance of the Judgment

The judgment in S.K. Tanwar v. Union of India serves as a notable reminder of the procedural intricacies involved in addressing complaints, particularly those related to sexual harassment, in the workplace. It highlights the importance of a preliminary inquiry as a vital step in the process, designed to assess the need for a more comprehensive and formal investigation. The ruling safeguards the principles of natural justice while ensuring that investigations are conducted meticulously and transparently, with opportunities for all parties involved to present their perspectives.

Protecting Due Process in Workplace Investigations

Workplace investigations, especially those concerning sensitive matters like sexual harassment, necessitate adherence to due process and established procedures. Preliminary inquiries, as endorsed by the Delhi High Court, play a crucial role in determining the course of further investigations, ensuring fairness, transparency, and accountability. By following structured procedures and respecting principles of natural justice, organizations can uphold the rights of both complainants and respondents while fostering a safe and respectful work environment for all employees.