1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 86 OF 2008 CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 86 OF 2008 CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 86 OF 2008 IN IN IN WRIT PETITION NO. 2641 OF 2005 WRIT PETITION NO. 2641 OF 2005 WRIT PETITION NO. 2641 OF 2005 Dr.Smt. Vathsalya K. Shetty. . .. Petitioner. vs. Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation & Ors. .. Respondents. Ms. N.D. Buch i/by Shailesh More for Petitioner. Ms. Manjula Rao i/by P.M. Havnur for Respondent No.4. Mr. C.U. Singh, Sr. Adv. with Ms. A.K. Savla for Respondent/BMC. CORAM: J.N. PATEL, & CORAM: J.N. PATEL, & CORAM: J.N. PATEL, & K.K. TATED, JJ. K.K. TATED, JJ. K.K. TATED, JJ. DATE: 9TH SEPTEMBER, 2008. DATE: 9TH SEPTEMBER, 2008. DATE: 9TH SEPTEMBER, 2008. P.C. . The petitioner has taken out this chamber summons to seek amendments to the petition so as to place on record subsequent developments in the matter of enquiry conducted by the Committee against sexual harassment, the appellate order and the findings recorded by the competent authority, A.M.C. (E.S.) 2 which held that the charges i.e. behaviour of the respondent Dr. Banga and attitude towards his colleagues, subordinates and students, particularly female staff members was undesirable and intimidative and recommended stoppage of one increment for one year which order passed by the Disciplinary Authority was subsequently challenged before the appellate authority who has remanded the matter vide its order dated 23.3.2008. 2. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the reliefs sought for by the petitioner against the respondents is in the representative capacity as she is one of the subordinate staff members who was working under Dr. Banga. She is aggrieved by his exoneration and, therefore, wants to incorporate the proposed amendment and, therefore, the chamber summons be allowed. 3. On the other hand, Mr. C.U. Singh, the learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Municipal Corporation, submits that the petitioner having conceded the findings of the Committee on account of charges (a) and (b) which were directly related to her complaint, cannot agitate the issue by seeking the proposed amendment as she has no locus standi in the matter. Her contention that the relief sought by her is in representative capacity also does not justify seeking such amendments to the petition and, therefore, 3 the chamber summons needs to be rejected. 4. We have gone through the proposed amendment which is sought by taking out this chamber summons. In our view, what the petitioner seeks to place on record are the subsequent developments and the findings of the disciplinary committee exonerating Dr. Banga of all the charges. Therefore, it cannot be said that this is a new cause of action which the petitioner wants to place on record by way of amending the petition. 5. The respondents would have ample opportunity to file an additional affidavit by way of consequential amendment through their return in order to meet the case of the petitioner where all these issues and contentions can be raised right from locus standi of the petitioner and that the petitioner is abusing the process of the court by seeking such reliefs. Therefore, we are inclined to allow the chamber summons. The chamber summons is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). Necessary amendment be carried out within two weeks. We direct the petitioner to place on record the amended copy of the petition by updating the petition and furnish copies of the same to the parties. Liberty to the respondents to file their additional affidavits to meet the case of the petitioner within two weeks thereafter. S.O. to 7.10.2008 along with the motion. 4 (J.N. Patel, J.) (J.N. Patel, J.) (J.N. Patel, J.) (K.K. Tated J.) (K.K. Tated J.) (K.K. Tated J.)