- (1.) The petitioner contends that the respondent authorities acted without jurisdiction in entertaining a complaint on alleged sexual harassment against the petitioner on the complaint of the private respondent, despite the fact that both of them are of the same gender.
(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner places reliance on a portion of the complaint, annexed at page 53 (Annexure P-5) of the writ petition, in particular Clauses (iv) and (v), to stress the point that the allegation of the private respondent revolved around alleged vilifying and defaming the private respondent in public. It is submitted that the act as alleged, could not fall within the purview of "sexual harassment"? as contemplated in the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013.
(3.) Mr. Soumya Majumder, Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner places particular reliance on the definition of "sexual harassment"? in Section 2(n) of the said Act and seeks to impress upon the Court that the acts contemplated therein have no nexus with the present complaint.;