IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 21ST AUGUST 2009 / 30TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 9632 of 2008(V) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- D.VIJAYAKUMARI, D/O.JANAMMA, JOINT DIRECTOR, TREASURY DIRECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.SASTHAMANGALAM S. AJITHKUMAR SRI.SHAJIN S.HAMEED RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. E.K.PRAKASH, DIRECTOR OF TREASURIES, TREASURY DIRECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. SALIM P.A. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: W.P.C.NO. 9632/2008 -------------------------------------------------------------------- EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DT. 22-1-2008. [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 9632 of 2008 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 21st August, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the Joint Director of Treasuries working in the Directorate of Treasuries, Thiruvananthapuram, where the 1st respondent is the Director of Treasuries. The petitioner alleges sexual harassment at the hands of the 1st respondent. She seeks the following reliefs: “a. To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the 1st respondent not to harass the petitioner either mentally or physically at the work place and permit her to work with human dignity. b. To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to conduct an enquiry upon Ext. P1 complaint and to take action as expeditiously as possible. c. To issue a direction to the 2nd respondent to ensure that women are safeguarded at their work place under the control of the 2nd respondent from gender discrimination and sexual harassment.” 2. Learned Government Pleader makes available to me a copy of an order dated 18-7-2008, which shows that an enquiry has been conducted into the complaint filed by the petitioner in this regard and it was found that the allegations raised by the petitioner against the 1st respondent are without any basis and consequently no further proceedings can be taken in the complaint of the petitioner. In view of the said order, I am of opinion that the petitioner's remedy lies in challenging that order appropriately. Therefore, without prejudice to that right, this writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/