Topic
Sexual harassment under Indian law is governed by the POSH Act and service rules, covering physical and non-physical misconduct in workplaces and institutions.
Meghalaya HC upholds suspension of MCA Honorary Secretary under POSH Act, validates Ombudsman de facto despite AGM appointment rule breach, quashes meetings held in violation of court orders.
The tribunal ruled that once an Internal Complaints Committee substantiates sexual harassment allegations, the employer's statutory obligation under the POSH Act to ensure a safe workplace takes precedence over transfer policies and the employee's tenure expectations. This upholds preventive transfers as a legitimate tool to protect complainants and maintain institutional integrity in service law.
The Madras HC quashed a suspension and demotion order under the SH Act, 2013, holding the inquiry violated natural justice by denying accused a chance to defend himself, and stressed that SH Act inquiries must give accused a hearing to protect rights.
An ICC email declaring a complaint lacks a sexual element is deemed a ‘recommendation’ under Section 13(2) of the POSH Act, permitting a Section 18 appeal. The Bombay HC set aside the Industrial Court’s order, remanding the case for fresh consideration and confirming the right to appeal.
Allahabad High Court rules that Internal Complaints Committees (ICCs) cannot reject delayed complaints under the POSH Act without a reasoned analysis of merits. The court emphasized full compliance with natural justice principles, including recording complainant statements and allowing cross-examination, before concluding guilt. This ruling impacts workplace harassment inquiries across educational and research institutions.
Bombay High Court at Goa rules that the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) cannot shield the identity of a known instigator of a false sexual harassment complaint under the POSH Act. The court directed the ICC to amend its findings to explicitly name the principal who coerced the complainant, ensuring transparency and accountability in workplace harassment proceedings.
The Bombay High Court has ruled that for sexual harassment inquiries conducted before the POSH Act, procedural fairness under certified Standing Orders is sufficient to validate a domestic enquiry-no Vishaka Complaints Committee is required. This clarifies the legal standard for employers and labour courts handling legacy cases, ensuring disciplinary processes aren't invalidated by anachronistic compliance demands.
Bombay HC rules that institutions with special statutes like the POSH Act need not conduct a separate departmental inquiry under CCS(CCA) Rules for major penalties like compulsory retirement. The ICC report under POSH Act is conclusive when institutional policies explicitly override general service rules, streamlining disciplinary proceedings for sexual harassment cases.
Bombay High Court Nagpur Bench rules that allegations of sexual harassment through WhatsApp messages, without physical contact, do not warrant automatic arrest under BNS 75(2). Anticipatory bail granted where the accused cooperated with investigation, charge-sheet was filed, and no further evidence was required. This sets a precedent for proportionality in arrest discretion for non-physical offences under the new criminal code.
The Madras High Court ruled that employees suspended pending sexual harassment inquiries are entitled to subsistence allowance from the date of suspension, including arrears, until the inquiry concludes. The judgment reinforces that financial security is a fundamental aspect of natural justice, regardless of the allegations' gravity, impacting all suspended employees under service law.
CAT holds that Women's Complaint Committee lacks jurisdiction to investigate non-sexual harassment complaints and cannot initiate disciplinary proceedings. Key natural justice violations identified.
Punjab and Haryana High Court holds that public servants are entitled to salary and benefits from date of resignation till formal acceptance, even if delayed by employer.