APPAREL EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL versus AK. CHOPRA

APPAREL EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL versus AK. CHOPRA

The respondent's conduct constituted sexual harassment within the meaning of service law and constitutional guarantees. Physical contact is not a necessary ingredient; any unwelcome behaviour with sexual overtones suffices. The High Court erred in interfering with the punishment imposed by the employer as the evidence established the charge, and such reduction is a retrograde step negatively impacting gender equality. Judicial review does not empower the courts to substitute their own findings on facts or quantum of punishment unless the findings are perverse or legally untenable.

Parties
Appellant: Apparel Export Promotion Council; Respondent: A.K. Chopra
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
20 January 1999
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Sexual Harassment, Disciplinary Proceedings, Judicial Review, Gender Equality, Human Rights
Service Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Sexual Harassment Disciplinary Proceedings Judicial Review Gender Equality Human Rights

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Apparel Export Promotion Council

Appellant

A.K. Chopra

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conduct of the respondent amounts to sexual harassment and warrants removal from service
  2. 2 Is physical contact an essential ingredient for sexual harassment at workplace
  3. 3 Approach expected from courts in cases involving sexual harassment

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent's conduct constituted sexual harassment within the meaning of service law and constitutional guarantees. Physical contact is not a necessary ingredient; any unwelcome behaviour with sexual overtones suffices. The High Court erred in interfering with the punishment imposed by the employer as the evidence established the charge, and such reduction is a retrograde step negatively impacting gender equality. Judicial review does not empower the courts to substitute their own findings on facts or quantum of punishment unless the findings are perverse or legally untenable.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Impugned order of the High Court set aside.
  • Punishment of removal from service imposed by Disciplinary Authority and upheld by Departmental Appellate Authority restored.