The apex court Thursday ruled out any action by it, noting that Ganguly was not a sitting judge when the incident occurred.
The committee's report, submitted to Chief Justice P. Sathasivam Nov 28 and posted on apex court website Thursday, said: "The Committee is of the considered view that the statement of (law intern, now a lawyer) both written and oral, prima facie discloses an act of unwelcome behaviour (unwelcome verbal/non-verbal conduct of sexual nature) by Mr. Justice (retd) A.K. Ganguly with her in the room in hotel Le Meridien on Dec 24, 2012 approximately between 8 p.m. and 10.30 p.m."
The report was dated Nov 27.
The committee said that prior to drawing this conclusion, it both carefully scrutinized the statements of the complainant, the affidavits of her three witnesses and the statement of Justice (retd) Ganguly.
"It appears to the committee that in the evening on Dec 24, 2012, (the law intern, now a lawyer) had visited hotel Le Meridien where Mr. Justice (retd) A.K. Ganguly was staying to assist him in his work. This fact is not denied by Mr. Justice (retd) A.K. Ganguly in his statement."
After considering the report, a full bench of the apex court said: "Considering the fact that the said intern was not an intern on the roll of the Supreme Court and that the concerned Judge had already demitted office on account of superannuation on the date of the incident, no further follow up action is required by this court."
"As decided by the full court in its meeting dated Dec 5, 2013, it is made clear that the representations made against former judges of this court are not entertainable by the administration of the Supreme Court," the court said.
Following the media reports on the incident, Chief Justice Sathasivam had set up a three-member judges committee to go into the correctness of the allegation by law intern.
After being considered by the full bench, the apex court's secretary general was directed to supply a copy of the inquiry committee to the intern and Justice Ganguly. The secretary general was also asked to put it on the Supreme Court website.
--IANS (Posted on 05-12-2013)