Pranav was appointed in the service of Innovative Publications Ltd. (A Company in the business of newspaper publications in name of Innovations Daily), as the Chief Sub-Editor in January, 2020. Thereafter on 01.01.2022 h

Pranav was appointed in the service of Innovative Publications Ltd. (A Company in the business of newspaper publications in name of Innovations Daily), as the Chief Sub-Editor in January, 2020. Thereafter on 01.01.2022 he was promoted as Chief of News Bureau. The Company transferred Pranav to its Kozhikode Unit on 27.05.2022. However, without accepting the transfer order, on 30.05.2022, he had applied for leave from 01.06.2022 to 30.06.2022. Thereafter, on 01.07.2022, he again applied for leave for a further period of 50 days. Though Pranav had been directed to join duty at Kozhikode, he did not do so. Therefore, the Company issued a letter dated 10.11.2022 cautioning Pranav against taking leave for such a long duration. Since Pranav did not abide by the said communication, he was issued with a memo dated 29.11.2022 alleging grave misconduct. Pranav joined duty at Kozhikode thereafter. However, he was reluctant to discharge of his duties diligently. Subsequently, Pranav was transferred to Kollam as a Desk Editor of the Quilon Bureau on 13.04.2023. On 20.06.2023, a memo was issued to Pranav alleging unauthorised leave. Since he did not show any improvement, a show cause notice dated 22.07.2023 was issued to Pranav seeking his explanation. He was also informed by the said communication that the company would be constrained to terminate his services if his explanation was not submitted within three days. Pranav did not submit any explanation and therefore, he was dismissed from service on 05.08.2023. Pranav raised an industrial dispute under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to the Labour Court. Pranav claimed that he was designated as Chief of News Bureau, the duties discharged by him were those of a Working Journalist. He was the President of the Working Journalists Union during 2022-2023. During the period he was President, he had demanded enhancement of the wages inviting the wrath of the employer. His dismissal is on baseless charges and is motivated by the personal animosity nurtured by the employer. Though it was contended that his work was supervisory in nature, no evidence was adduced by the management in support of the said claim. Pranav's wife Bhumika was working as a Clerk-Typist in the Office of the Managing Director (MD) of Fine Fabrics Ltd. and Bhumika was reporting to Mahendra, Senior Manager of the MD's Secretariat. The FFL is engaged in manufacturing of synthetic yarn. A meeting of some foreign clients of the FFL was kept in a Five Star Hotel. Mahendra insisted Bhumika to go with him to the Hotel for taking dictation from the MD and type out the matter. Under the pressure of Mahendra, Bhumika went to take the dictation from the MD. While Bhumika was waiting in adjoining room for the dictation from the MD, Mahendra tried to sit too close to Bhumika and despite her objection he did not give up his objectionable behaviour. Bhumika later took dictation from the MD. Mahendra told her to type and get its print out. Since the laptop and printer were located in the basement of the Hotel, Mahendra volunteered to show her the basement for getting the matter typed and taking advantage of the isolated place and again tried to sit very close to her despite her objections. The draft typed matter was corrected by MD who asked Bhumika to retype the same. Mahendra again accompanied with Bhumika to the basement and repeated his overtures. Bhumika warned Mahendra that she would leave the place if he continued to behave like that, however, Mahendra did not stop and continued his objectionable acts. Next day, Bhumika made a written complaint to the MD. Pranav's child, named Akshay is just 10 years old but performs dance very well and participated in the School dance competitions. He also participated in the famous TV show of 'Dance India' which is telecasted on the TV having nationwide presence. In this background, answer the following questions: Under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) the sexual harassment includes a demand or request for sexual favours or making sexually coloured remarks; or showing pornography, but in the given case Mahendra has simply accompanied with Bhumika to the basement of the Hotel to get the matter typed and print and had done nothing which may amounts to sexual harassment. Further the place was not the Office place of Bhumika but it was Hotel. Based on the given facts, whether the conduct of Mahendra shall be termed as sexual harassment when there was no physical contact and despite the fact, the incident happened in the Hotel which was not the workplace of Bhumika? Give your answer with the decided case law.