NHRC, India iii. However, the Commission observed that it was well established from the records that the complainant was sexually harassed by a staff member of the Institute, and no timely action was taken by the Institute despite her complaint to the senior officers of the Institute. Thus, the Commission, vide its proceeding dated 10.11.2020, issued a Show Cause Notice to the Director of the Indian Statistical Institute to explain why compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/should not be recommended for the violation of her human rights. iv. In response, the Officiating Executive (Admin & Finance), Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata, submitted a reply to the show cause notice stating therein that a written complaint was submitted by the victim against the accused person. The ISI conducted an inquiry as per the norms laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the Vishakhacase. On the recommendation of the ICC, strong disciplinary action was taken against the said accused person. The Chief Executive Officer (A&F) and the Dy Chief Executive (Admn.) paid a visit to the said branch and interacted with the complainant and reassured her to continue her work as a contractual cook fearlessly. v. The Institute administration also took various measures to boost the morale of workers stationed there. Even after repeated assurance from the Institute administration, she lodged an FIR against the accused officer and other officials of the Institute related withthe incident of sexual harassment. As per the policy of the Institute, the contractual workers of the Institute were presently engaged through an outsourcing agency and the complainant was now engaged as a Skilled Cook in ISI Giridih branch through that agency. It is further submitted that a sense of insecurity and joblessness was not an issue as the victim was now working in the Institute in a free and peaceful environment with adequate security arrangements and she had withdrawn her complaint lodged with Labour Enforcement Officer. The fear and apprehension of the victim after the incident of outraging her modesty in her workplace are natural by far from the facts. The Institute had taken adequate steps to ensure a free, fair and secure environment for her so that she may continue the said work in the Institute. After stating so, it was prayed that now the matter may be closed, and no compensation should be granted to her as the Institute has taken adequate steps to protect her financial and other social welfare entitlements proactively. vi. The Commission observed that it was not inclined to accept the prayer of the respondent that the Institute had now taken adequate steps to protect the victim financially or otherwise, and hence no compensation should be granted to her. The authorities have even failed to realise that the recommendation of payment of monetary compensation to the victim, in the instant case, was on the ground that the authorities were negligent in the prevention of the violation of the human rights of the victim affecting her dignity. For such omission and negligence, the Institute owes vicarious liability, which cannot be dispensed with merely on the ground that, at present, the Institute has taken adequate steps to protect her financial and other social welfare entitlements proactively. For the above-said reasons, the Commission confirmed its recommendation vide proceeding dated 17.3.2021. ANNUAL REPORT 105 2021-22