Report clearing Air France officer of sexual harassment invalid: Delhi HC
The Delhi high court directed Air France to inquire afresh into allegations of repeated sexual harassment made by an Indian employee against a Frenchman and senior executive at the airline.india Updated: May 30, 2018 23:54 IST
Emphasising that the Vishaka Guidelines were to be taken seriously, the Delhi high court on Wednesday directed Air France to inquire afresh into allegations of repeated sexual harassment made by an Indian employee against a Frenchman and senior executive at the airline.
A bench of justice S Ravindra Bhat and justice AK Chawla said the Internal Complaints Committee constituted by Air France on the complaints made by the woman working at its Gurgaon office, and the panel’s resultant proceedings were invalid, and set them aside.
The court’s ruling came on an appeal by the woman, who alleged sexual harassment by Stanislas Brun, who was marketing manager, cargo (India, Nepal and Bhutan) in 2013. His LinkedIn profile lists his job as managing director, Middle East, Gulf & Indian Subcontinent, Air France-KLM Cargo and Martinair Cargo
The court invoked the Vishakha Guidelines, which laid down the procedural steps for use in cases of sexual harassment.
“This court wishes to emphasize here that the Vishaka Guidelines are to be taken seriously. The march of our society to... sensitivity to the issue of sexual harassment and its baneful effects, flagged in Vishaka (supra), culminated in the path-breaking Workplace Harassment Prohibition Act over 17 years later,” the bench said. It noted that decision makers, Parliament, courts and employers are to be vigilant in ensuring that effective policies are swiftly and impartially enforced to ensure justice and see that no one is subjected to unwelcome and unacceptable behaviour at the workplace.
The complainant alleged hat she had been victimised for complaining against the sexual harassment and forced to resign by three persons in the airline on September 23, 2017.
She claimed that she had been threatened with immediate termination of employment and told that she wouldn’t be getting any letter or documentation of her service and provident fund from the company.