Author: Supreet Kaur Sethi

A Practical and Legal Study of Workplace Safety and Compliance in India

1. Background & Objective of the Act

The issue of sexual harassment at the workplace is not merely a question of individual misconduct but one that directly impacts women’s right to equality, dignity, and livelihood.If a person is not treated right at the place they work would they confidently even come to the workplace anymore ? For decades, women in India faced workplace harassment and had no specific legal remedy tailored for workplace realities. Why was it hard to make and implement a legal remedy that would safeguard and protect and a woman’s dignity and safety. First off all women didn’t lodged a complaint in fear of stigma and what would the society would say and if they lodged a complaint then they were often dismissed as “personal matter” and victims were expected to keep their mouth shut, resolve the issue on their own or ultimately leave the job. In a country where we worship woman as a goddess why don’t we first see them as human first ? why don’t we give them basic human rights first and let them follow their dreams without the fear of their dignity being dragged through mud because of the wrong intentions of others.

The absence of legislation was felt only after the brutal gangrape of a social worker in the course of her employment, when she had just opposed a child marriage in Rajasthan. This was the of Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997). The Hon’ble Supreme Court recognised that sexual harassment at the workplace violates fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15, 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution of India. Since there was no enacted law at the time, the Court specifically  framed the Vishaka Guidelines, placing responsibility on employers to prevent and redress sexual harassment.

However,  like all the other laws and guidelines that have been rolled out before this and are binding on the citizens , this too, while is binding on everyone, was poorly implemented across organizations. Recognizing the gap, and in accordance of India’s role and obligations under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), the Indian Parliament rolled out Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, commonly known as the POSH Act.

The objective of this Act is:
firstly, to prevent sexual harassment at workplaces.
secondly, to prohibit such conduct through clear definitions and duties.
And lastly, to provide an effective redressal mechanism for those women who are aggrieved.

This Act marks an important shift in Indian labour and constitutional jurisprudence by recognizing that a safe workplace is a very important and necessary precondition to women’s meaningful participation in the workforce if they want to give women the same equality that everyone else has.

2. Who Does the Act Apply To?

The POSH Act is drafted in a way so that it has a very wide scope, which will  ensure that any kind of technicalities do not deny protection in any case.

Applicability to Women

The Act applies to any and every woman, irrespective of her age or employment status(even if they are interns, students, daily wage workers or freelancers). This also includes permanent employees, temporary or ad-hoc workers, contractual employees, interns, trainees, consultants, volunteers, and even domestic workers. Importantly, the protection is available even if the woman is not drawing a salary or is working without a formal appointment letter.However, the Act is gender-specific in nature. While the respondent may be of any gender, only women can file complaints under this Act. This aspect has often been debated but the Act  continues to reflect the legislative intent which addresses historical workplace inequality which was faced by women.

Applicability to Workplaces

The definition of “workplace” under the Act is very broad and inclusive. It covers not only traditional office spaces but also government bodies, private establishments, educational institutions, hospitals, sports organizations, and NGOs. Additionally, any place visited by an employee during the course of employment including transportation provided by the employer is considered a workplace. This expansive definition ensures that employers cannot evade responsibility by claiming that the incident occurred outside office premises. Though there are some people who would not be covered under this, for example, advocates they are governed under Advocates Act 1961 as there is a absence of a formal employer-employee relationship between advocates and the Bar Councils. This was said in a recent court hearing of the case UNS Women Legal Association vs. Bar Council of India , but this decision specifically highlights a protection gap for women lawyers because the POSH Act still applies to actual employees of Bar Councils.

3. Some of the Important Sections Explained-

1) Section 2(n): What constitutes as Sexual Harassment

Section 2(n) of the Act, defines what sexual harassment is. Sexual harassment is to include physical contact and even advances, demands or requests for sexual favours, sexually coloured remarks, showing pornography, and any other unwelcome physical, verbal, or non-verbal conduct of a sexual nature. The importance of this provision lies in its broadly inclusive nature. The law and this Act does not restrict sexual harassment to just physical acts alone. Any behaviour that creates an intimidating, hostile, or uncomfortable work environment for the women employee can fall within its scope. The focus is on the impact of the conduct and how it impacts the women employee and not just the intent of the respondent.

2) Section 4: Constitution of Internal Committee (IC)

Every workplace with ten or more employees is mandatorly required to constitute an Internal Committee (IC). The IC must be headed by a senior woman employee and include at least two employee members and one external member from an NGO or legal background.The presence of an external member is crucial as it ensures independence and fairness in the inquiry process. Courts have repeatedly held that improper constitution of the IC amounts to non-compliance with the Act.

3) Section 6: Local Committee (LC)

For workplaces with fewer than ten employees, or where the complaint is against the employer himself, the Act provides for a Local Committee at the district level. This provision ensures that women working in small establishments or informal sectors are not left without remedies.

4) Section 9: Filing of Complaint

An aggrieved woman must file a complaint within three months from the date of the incident. The Act allows an extension of another three months if sufficient cause is shown. This flexibility recognises the psychological and social barriers that often prevent immediate reporting.

5) Section 11: Inquiry into Complaint

The Internal or Local Committee is required to conduct a fair inquiry following the principles of natural justice. The inquiry must be completed within ninety days. Where service rules apply, the inquiry must align with them, making POSH proceedings quasi-judicial in nature.

6) Section 13: Inquiry Report and Recommendations

After the inquiry, the Committee submits its report and may recommend disciplinary action, written apology, counselling, or payment of compensation. These recommendations are binding on the employer.

4. Rights, Duties & Penalties

Rights of the Aggrieved Woman

The Act guarantees several rights to the aggrieved woman, including the right to a safe working environment, confidentiality of proceedings, interim relief during the inquiry, and a time-bound, impartial investigation.

Duties of Employers

Employers are required to provide a safe workplace, constitute and maintain a functional IC, conduct awareness programmes, and assist the aggrieved woman in filing criminal complaints where required. POSH compliance is not optional; it is a statutory duty.

Penalties for Non-Compliance

Failure to comply with the Act can result in a fine of up to ₹50,000. Repeated violations may lead to enhanced penalties and even cancellation of business licences.

5. Practical Examples 

Consider a female intern who receives repeated inappropriate messages from her supervisor. Despite being a temporary intern, she is protected under the POSH Act and can approach the Internal Committee. Similarly, if a  harassment occurs during an official conference or office trip, it will fall within the definition of a workplace. These examples demonstrate that the Act prioritises substance over form and a very board view of what will constitute as a workplace.

6. What are some of the common myths or mistakes

A common misconception is that sexual harassment requires physical contact. In reality, verbal remarks or non-verbal gestures alone can constitute harassment.Another frequent mistake is “paper compliance,” where employers constitute an IC but fail to train members or conduct awareness programmes. Courts have consistently criticised such superficial compliance.

7.  Some Landmark Cases and Judicial Developments 

Judicial interpretation has played a very crucial role in shaping the law on sexual harassment at the workplace in India. As we have already discussed above , even before the enactment of the POSH Act, the judiciary recognised that sexual harassment is not merely an issue of personal misconduct but a violation of fundamental rights and workplace equality. The courts have consistently emphasised that employers have an active duty to prevent harassment and ensure that the working environment is safe.

In Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, As discussed earlier the foundation of workplace sexual harassment law in India was laid in this case by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The Supreme Court was confronted with the absence of any specific legislation which directly addressed sexual harassment at the workplace. The Court held that sexual harassment violates women’s fundamental rights under Articles 14 (equality before law), 15 (prohibition of discrimination), 19(1)(g) (right to practice any profession), and 21 (right to life and dignity). Importantly, the Court recognised that the right to work with dignity is inseparable from the right to life. Until appropriate legislation was enacted, the Court framed the Vishaka Guidelines, making it mandatory for employers to take preventive and remedial measures. These guidelines later became the backbone of the POSH Act, 2013.

In Apparel Export Promotion Council v. A.K. Chopra (1999), the Hon’ble Supreme Court expanded the understanding of what constitutes sexual harassment. The respondent argued that since there was no physical contact, the conduct could not amount to sexual harassment. Rejecting this argument, the Court held that physical contact is not a necessary element and that any act which is unwelcome and has sexual overtones can amount to sexual harassment. The judgment reinforced the idea that the law must focus on the effect of the conduct on the woman, rather than the intent of the perpetrator. This principle continues to guide POSH inquiries today.

In Medha Kotwal Lele v. Union of India (2013), the Supreme Court expressed serious concern over the poor implementation of the Vishaka Guidelines across the country. The Court noted that despite clear judicial directions, many organisations had failed to establish complaint mechanisms. The Court directed all states and employers to ensure strict compliance and emphasised that failure to do so would amount to a violation of fundamental rights. This judgment played a crucial role in pushing for statutory enforcement and accountability, reinforcing that mere formal compliance is insufficient.

Post-enactment of the POSH Act, courts have increasingly scrutinised the constitution and functioning of Internal Committees (ICs). In several cases, courts have set aside inquiry findings where the IC was improperly constituted, lacked an external member, or failed to follow principles of natural justice. Judicial decisions have clarified that an IC is not a casual administrative body but a quasi-judicial authority, and its proceedings must be fair, unbiased, and reasoned.Courts have also addressed the issue of confidentiality under the POSH Act. Disclosure of the identity of parties or details of proceedings has been treated seriously, with courts reiterating that confidentiality is essential to protect the dignity of the aggrieved woman and encourage reporting.

Recent judicial trends show a growing emphasis on employer negligence and vicarious liability. Employers can no longer escape responsibility by claiming that harassment was an individual act. Where employers fail to create awareness, conduct training, or act on IC recommendations, courts have held them accountable for violating statutory duties under the POSH Act.

8. Conclusion: Why does this Act matters today

The POSH Act plays a crucial role in ensuring that women can participate in the workforce with dignity and security. While the law provides a comprehensive framework, its effectiveness depends on awareness, sensitivity, and genuine compliance by employers.

In an evolving work environment that includes internships, contractual work, and remote employment, the relevance of the POSH Act has only increased. Ensuring its proper implementation is not merely a legal obligation but a constitutional and moral duty.