Ola case: High Court stays compensation, POSH probe order

By Rachana Ramesh

Saying matter needs consideration, bench halts it till October 28, date of next hearing

The High Court has temporarily halted an order issued by a single judge bench instructing ANI Technologies, the parent company of OLA Cabs, to compensate a woman who alleged sexual harassment by one of their drivers with a sum of Rs 5 lakh.

A vacation bench consisting of Justices SR Krishna Kumar and MG Uma said, “The matter requires consideration.” The bench then issued a notice to the respondents, returnable on October 28, and ordered a stay on the previous order until the next hearing date.

On September 30, a single judge bench led by Justice MGS Kamal had directed the company’s Internal Complaints Committee to conduct an investigation into the complaint, following the provisions of the Sexual Harassment of Woman At Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 [POSH Act]. The investigation must be completed within 90 days, and a report must be submitted to the District Officer.

The court had determined that under the POSH Act, the OLA driver would be considered an employee of the company. Senior Advocate Dhyan Chinnappa, representing the appellant, argued that since OLA does not directly employ the driver, the applicability of the PoSH Act in this case is questionable.

The petitioner alleged that she was subjected to sexual harassment in 2019, but her complaint to ANI Technologies, requesting action against the driver, was not addressed. As a result, the petitioner approached the high court, seeking a directive for the company to investigate her complaint.

Stick to 2017 notification: Demonetised notes can be exchanged

The High Court has instructed trial courts to adhere to the procedure outlined in the Centre’s 2017 notification for releasing demonetised banknotes that were produced by investigating agencies on or before December 30, 2016. This will enable individuals to exchange the notes for legal tender.

In their order, a division bench comprising Justices S Sunil Dutt Yadav and Ramachandra D Huddar stated, “Unless there is adherence to the requirements of the notification strictly, parties to the litigation would be prejudiced irreparably without any lapse on their part. Accordingly, the investigating agencies and the Courts are to adhere to the requirements of the notification dated 12.05.2017 strictly.”

The Union Ministry of Finance’s notification from May 12, 2017, outlines that when specified Bank notes are confiscated by investigating agencies and deposited by the Court, the person who receives the notes from the Court may seek to exchange them for legal tender by producing the Court’s direction. However, two conditions must be met to benefit from this notification. Firstly, the law enforcement agency must mention the serial numbers of the confiscated and/or produced notes. Secondly, the Court’s direction enabling the litigant to request an exchange must include the serial numbers of the seized notes when permitting their return to the person involved in the case.

The court emphasised that investigating agencies and courts should take note of these directions to enable litigants to exchange the demonetized currency for legal tender. The order was passed while deciding an appeal filed by the Reserve Bank of India, which had challenged a single judge bench’s order directing it to consider a representation made by an individual seeking to exchange certain bank notes.