Supreme Court Sends Notice Regarding Petition for Protection of Internal Complaints Committees in Private Firms.
The Supreme Court has notified the Union Government about a petition that seeks to protect Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) members in private companies from unfair and retaliatory actions related to their decisions during sexual harassment inquiries at work. The Court was reviewing a Public Interest Litigation that points out the lack of protections for ICC members in private firms, unlike their counterparts in the public sector who enjoy fixed terms and safeguards against arbitrary dismissal. The petitioners argue that this unequal treatment violates the equality guarantee under Article 14 of the Constitution.
After a short hearing, a two-Judge Bench, including Justice Surya Kant and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, issued notices to the Ministry of Women and Child Development, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, and the National Commission for Women. The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 requires every workplace with more than ten employees to have an ICC. The petitioners, represented by Advocate Abha Singh, emphasize that ICC members, who have the authority of a Civil Court during inquiries, often make decisions that may not align with the interests of senior management, making them vulnerable to retaliation, such as wrongful termination or demotion.
The SHWW Act aims to create a safe space for victims of sexual harassment but fails to protect the safety of ICC Members. It does not consider the risk of harassment or pressure that ICC Members may face from senior officials at work. The Petitioners argue that this oversight violates their right to a safe environment under Article 21 and affects their right to choose their profession under Article 19(1)(g). The Petitioners, Janaki Chaudhry, a former corporate executive who led a sexual harassment prevention committee, and retired journalist Olga Tellis, who understands the challenges faced by women in ICCs in the private sector, have brought this case to court.
The Petition, prepared by Advocates Munawwar Naseem and Abha Singh, highlights that Section 11(3) of the Act gives ICCs the same powers as a Civil Court for inquiries, allowing them to summon individuals and request documents. However, due to a lack of protections against arbitrary actions, the ability of members to act freely is reduced, according to the Petition. It points out that there is a strange situation where ICC members have quasi-judicial powers but lack the necessary independence and safeguards. Additionally, the Petition notes that neither the Act nor its Rules ensure job security for Protection of Sexual Harassment officers in the private sector. The Act only sets a maximum tenure of three years for POSH Officers without a minimum requirement. It also states that the Act does not provide any mechanism for addressing grievances that ICC members may encounter during their time in office.
The Petitioners have requested a Writ of mandamus to the Ministry of Women and Child Development. They want the Ministry to ensure the service conditions of ICC members are protected, declare all ICC members as public servants, create a commission to review the Act, and establish an external redressal committee for ICC members’ grievances. In April 2022, Chaudhry, the first Petitioner, filed a Public Interest Litigation in the Bombay High Court for similar relief but withdrew it after the Court stated it lacked jurisdiction to grant the requested reliefs.
Chaudhry and Tellis then submitted a Writ Petition to the Supreme Court, which allowed them to approach the relevant authorities. The Court’s order on April 13, 2023, stated that the current writ petition would be considered a representation to the authorities. If the Petitioners still feel their grievances need legal action, they can seek appropriate remedies under the law. The Petitioners approached the Secretary of the Ministry in May but did not get a quick response. After sending a reminder, a meeting was held with Ministry officials, who assured the Petitioner’s legal representative that a committee would be formed within three months to address the issues in the Act. However, they claim this committee was never created.
Cause Title: Janaki Chaudhry & Anr. v. Ministry of Women And Child Development & Ors. [W.P.(C) 796/2024 PIL-W]
