Chapter-3 section 5-8 POSH ACT,2013

 Chapter -3 section 5-8

This chapter lays down the institutional and procedural framework for how sexual harassment complaints should be addressed in the workplace.

And to make it more practical, we’ll also look at important case laws where these sections were applied—or ignored—with serious consequences."

SECTION 5 – Notification of the Order

"Section 5 places a "legal duty on the District Officer" to "notify the constitution of the Local Complaints Committee (LCC)" in every district."

What does this mean?

* When an LCC is formed, the District Officer must "publicly announce" and "circulate" that information.

* This is crucial for women working in the "unorganized sector" or "workplaces with fewer than 10 employees", where there is no Internal Committee.

  Why is this important?

* It ensures "access to justice" for vulnerable women workers—like domestic workers, construction laborers, freelancers, or contract staff.

* Without this notification, women may not even know where to go to file a complaint.

🧑‍⚖️ Case Law: K. Ajitha v. State of Kerala (2018)

The Kerala High Court emphasized that failure to "notify the LCC properly" could result in "denial of justice".

The court directed the state to ensure proper "awareness campaigns and public notice".

          Must watch :- Chapter-3 section 5-8 POSH ACT,2013

SECTION 6 – Constitution of the Internal Committee

"Section 6 makes it mandatory for every employer with "10 or more employees" to form an "Internal Committee (IC)" at each office or unit."

Composition of the IC:

1. Presiding Officer: A senior-level woman employee

2. Two members: From among employees, with experience in social work, legal knowledge, or commitment to women’s causes.

3. One external member:From an NGO or someone with experience in women's rights.

📌 Every office, every branch, must have its **own Internal Committee**.

🧑‍⚖️ Landmark Case: Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997)

Although this case predates the Act, the "Supreme Court laid the foundation" for the POSH law.

It stressed that all workplaces "must have a redressal mechanism" to protect women from harassment.

This judgment led to the creation of Section 6.

🧑‍⚖️ Case: Medha Kotwal Lele v. Union of India (2013)

In this case, the SC took serious note of non-compliance and said:

 “If the Internal Complaints Committee is not in place, it is a violation of constitutional rights.”

So, if you're an employer and haven’t formed an IC yet—you’re already "breaking the law".

 SECTION 7 – Tenure of the Internal Committee Members

"Section 7 defines the "term of office" for Internal Committee members. Every member holds office for "three years" from the date of nomination."

But there’s more.

Removal of a Member:

A member "can be removed before their term" if:

* They disclose confidential information,

* Are convicted of a crime,

* Use their position to gain undue advantage, or

* Violate the code of conduct.

🧑‍⚖️ **Case Law: Saurabh Kumar Mallick v. Comptroller & Auditor General of India (2016)**

The Delhi High Court underlined the importance of **neutral and fair IC members**.

It ruled that **biased or unethical committee members** compromise the entire inquiry and lead to **miscarriages of justice**.

 SECTION 8 – Complaint Mechanism

"Section 8 highlights a core principle of the POSH Act – that it's not enough to just form a committee. Employers must also create a "functional and accessible complaint mechanism."

What does this include?

* A written POSH policy

* Display of contact details of IC and LCC members

* Training and sensitization programs for employees

* Ensuring confidentiality, no retaliation, and quick resolution.

🧑‍⚖️ Case Law: Dr. Punita K. Sodhi v. Union of India (2010)

Here, the Delhi High Court criticized a government department for failing to provide a proper forum for redressal.

The court ruled that such negligence amounted to institutional failure and could lead to legal action against the employer.

🧑‍⚖️ Case: Shital Prasad Sharma v. State of Rajasthan (2014)

The Rajasthan HC said every workplace must ensure that their complaint mechanism is not only present but also visible and accessible to all employees.

"So let’s recap what Chapter 3 of the POSH Act tells us:

* Section 5: District Officers must notify the formation of LCCs

* Section 6: Every workplace with 10+ employees must form an Internal Committee

* Section 7: IC members hold office for 3 years, unless removed for misconduct

* Section 8: Employers must implement a robust, fair complaint mechanism

"These aren't just checkboxes. These are l

egal duties. Failure to comply can—and has—led to strict actions by courts."

Chapter-2, Section -4, POSH ACT

 Section 4 of the POSH Act, 2013(The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013) deals with the Constitution of the Internal Committee (IC) in a workplace.

Let’s dive into Section 4 of the Posh Act, which is all about preventing sexual harassment at the workplace. This section emphasizes the employer's duty to provide a safe environment. It’s not just about having a policy; it’s about actively ensuring that employees feel secure and respected. 

Take the landmark case of Vishaka vs. State of Rajasthan. Here, the Supreme Court laid down guidelines that became the foundation for the Posh Act. The court highlighted that sexual harassment is a violation of fundamental rights, and employers must take proactive steps to address it. 

---CHAPTER II

CONSTITUTION h INTERNAL COMPLAINTS COMMITTEE

Sec. -4: Constitution of Internal Complaints Committee.

 📘 **POSH Act - Section 4: Constitution of Internal complaints Committee

**Key Provisions:**

1. Applicability: Every employer of a workplace with 10 or more employees must constitute an Internal Committee.

2. Composition of the ICC:

🔹Presiding Officer: A senior-level woman employee shall be the Presiding Officer.

🔹Two or more members: From among the employees, preferably committed to the cause of women or who have experience in social work or legal knowledge.

🔹External Member: One member from an NGO or association committed to the cause of women or familiar with issues relating to sexual harassment.

3. Gender Representation: At least one-half of the total members of the IC should be women.

4. Tenure: Members shall hold office for a period not exceeding three years, from the date of their nomination.

Purpose of Section 4

➡️ Ensures that there's a mechanism within the organization for dealing with complaints of sexual harassment.

➡️ Brings neutrality by including an external member.

➡️ Encourages women participation and leadership by mandating a woman as the Presiding Officer.

Importance of Section 4:

➡️ Legitimizes the IC to conduct inquiries.

➡️ Ensures representation and independence.

➡️ Prevents misuse by including an external, neutral party.

➡️ Failure to constitute a valid IC can lead to:

🔹 Inquiry being declared invalid.

🔹Employer facing legal action or penalties.

⚖️ **Important Case Laws on Section 4**

Vishaka & Others v. State of Rajasthan (1997)

➡️ Though predating the POSH Act, this Supreme Court judgment laid the "foundation" for the POSH Act and the concept of ICs.

➡️ The Court directed all workplaces to set up complaints committees — this directive evolved into Section 4 of the POSH Act.

Must watch:- Chapter-2 section-4, posh act

Medha Kotwal Lele v. Union of India (2012)

➡️ The Supreme Court observed "non-compliance" by many organizations with Vishaka guidelines.

➡️ It emphasized the "need for accountability" and led to the recommendation of statutory backing, which became the POSH Act, including Section 4.

Sanjeev Mishra v. Bank of Baroda (2021)

➡️ The IC was challenged for "bias and improper constitution".

➡️ The Court ruled that an improperly constituted IC "vitiates the inquiry process".

➡️ Reinforces the importance of proper constitution as per Section 4.

Global Health Private Ltd. v. Local Complaints Committee, District Indore & Ors (2021)

➡️ Issue: The employer didn’t constitute an Internal Committee (IC).

➡️ Ruling: Madhya Pradesh High Court held that "non-constitution of the IC is a violation of Section 4", and the "Local Complaints Committee (LCC)" can step in.

➡️ Significance: Emphasized the mandatory nature of setting up an IC under Section 4.

Dr. Punita K. Sodhi v. Union of India (2010)(pre-2013, but relevant)

➡️Delhi High Court observed that "internal inquiries must follow due process", and that the composition of the committee must be unbiased and compliant with guidelines (based on Vishaka guidelines, which preceded POSH Act).

➡️Importance: Reinforces the rationale behind Section 4.

Ayesha Khatun v. The State of West Bengal (2021)

➡️ The organization "constituted an IC without an external member".

➡️ Calcutta High Court held this was "non-compliant with Section 4".

➡️ Takeaway: External member’s inclusion is not optional.

Contact us 

Any Query or Any Other Legal Query

Contact us :-8375096958

Neelam

POSH ACT 2013, chapter 1, section 1-3

 The Protection of Women from Sexual Harassment at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) is a crucial legislation for ensuring a safe working environment for women. Below is a detailed breakdown of Chapter 1 (Sections 1-3) along with relevant case laws.

Chapter 1: Preliminary (Sections 1-3)

Section 1: Short Title, Extent, and Commencement

- Subsection (1): The Act is called the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013

- Subsection (2): It extends to the whole of India.

-Subsection (3): It came into force on 9th December 2013.

Relevant Case Law:  

Vishaka & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan (1997) 6 SCC 241  

  - Before the POSH Act, the Vishaka Guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court were the primary framework for preventing sexual harassment at workplaces.  

  - The case arose from the brutal gang rape of Bhanwari Devi, a social worker.  

  - The SC held that sexual harassment violates fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15, 19(1)(g), and 21.  

  - The POSH Act was later enacted to codify these guidelines.

                 Must watch:-    Posh act , chapter 1, section 1-3

Section 2: Definitions

Key definitions under this section include:  

- Aggrieved Woman (Section 2(a)): Any woman of any age (whether employed or not) alleging sexual harassment.  

- Employee (Section 2(f)): Includes regular, temporary, ad-hoc, daily wage workers, and even volunteers.  

- Workplace (Section 2(o)): Extends beyond traditional offices to include transport provided by the employer, off-sites, and even telecommuting.  

Relevant Case Laws: 

 

1. Medha Kotwal Lele v. Union of India (2013) 1 SCC 297

 - The SC reinforced the Vishaka Guidelines and directed all states to implement them strictly.  

 - Emphasized that failure to constitute a complaints committee is a violation of fundamental rights.  

2. Aureliano Fernandes v. State of Goa (2020) 3 SCC 506

   - The SC held that even a single instance of sexual harassment is sufficient to constitute an offense.  

   - Clarified that workplace includes any place visited during employment (e.g., official trips).  

 Section 3: Prevention of Sexual Harassment

 Subsection (1): No woman shall be subjected to sexual harassment at any workplace.  

 Subsection (2): Defines sexual harassment broadly, including:  

       - Physical contact & advances  

       - Demand for sexual favors  

       - Sexually colored remarks  

       - Showing pornography  

       - Any other unwelcome physical, verbal, or non-verbal conduct of a sexual nature.  

Relevant Case Laws:  

1. Apparel Export Promotion Council v. A.K. Chopra (1999) 1 SCC 759

   - The SC held that physical contact is not necessary to prove sexual harassment.  

   - Even lewd remarks or gestures can amount to harassment.  

   

2. Rupan Deol Bajaj v. K.P.S. Gill (1995) 6 SCC 194

   - A senior IPS officer slapped a woman IAS officer on her posterior in a public gathering.  

   - The SC ruled that even a single act of harassment is punishable.  

Key Takeaways for Judiciary Aspirants

1. Vishaka Guidelines were the foundation of the POSH Act.  

2. Workplace has an expansive definition (includes virtual workplaces post-COVID).  

3. Sexual harassment is not limited to physical acts—verbal/non-verbal conduct is equally punishable.  

4. Employers must constitute an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC)—non-compliance attracts penalties.  

Follow for more legal update and legal advice

WhatsApp no. 8375096958

Neelam

The Appointment of the Chief Justice of India: A Constitutional and Judicial Perspective

The process of appointing the Chief Justice of India (CJI) is an integral part of India's judicial system, ensuring both judicial independence and a smooth transition of leadership within the highest court of the land. While the Indian Constitution does not specifically enumerate the procedure for the appointment of the CJI, it outlines the establishment of the Supreme Court of India and designates the position of the Chief Justice under Article 124(1). Over time, judicial precedents have shaped the process, particularly the interpretation of Articles 124(2) and 124(1), and the norms governing the selection of the CJI.

Constitutional Framework and Judicial Precedents

Article 124(1) of the Indian Constitution simply states that there shall be a Supreme Court, and that it shall consist of a Chief Justice and such other judges as the President may deem fit. Article 124(2) further empowers the President to appoint the Chief Justice of India, albeit the method and criteria for this appointment have been influenced by judicial interpretations over the years.

In the landmark Second Judges Case (1993), the Supreme Court clarified that the appointment of the Chief Justice must follow the principle of seniority. This ruling established that the President of India must appoint the senior-most judge of the Supreme Court as the Chief Justice. The Court held that the "seniority principle" serves to maintain the independence and impartiality of the judiciary, preventing political influence in the selection of the highest judicial officer. However, the Constitution does not expressly codify this requirement, leaving it to the judicial interpretations to define the specifics.

                    Read Also:-   Chief justice of India 2024

Further refinement came in the Third Judges Case (1998), which resulted in the creation of the "collegium system." The collegium comprises the Chief Justice of India and a group of the next four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court. The Third Judges Case expanded on the Second Judges Case by emphasizing that the Chief Justice of India should consult with a plurality of senior judges before making recommendations regarding judicial appointments and transfers. In this context, the collegium system aims to ensure a collective decision-making process, reducing the risk of bias or undue influence in the selection of judges.

While the Supreme Court has stated that the CJI should generally be the senior-most judge, the President retains the discretion to appoint any judge of the Supreme Court to the position. This means that, in rare instances, the President may bypass the seniority principle, though such a decision has the potential to undermine the traditional norms of judicial independence.

Role of the President and the Prime Minister

Although the President of India holds the constitutional authority to appoint the Chief Justice of India, this decision is made based on the advice of the Union Law Minister, who in turn advises the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister then forwards the recommendation to the President. In practice, however, the appointment of the CJI is guided by the collegium's recommendation, a practice rooted in the Third Judges Case (1998). This system effectively minimizes executive interference in judicial appointments and reinforces the separation of powers between the judiciary and the executive.

Oath of Office and Tenure

Upon appointment, the Chief Justice of India takes an oath of office before the President of India, as per the constitutional requirement. The CJI holds office until the age of 65, or until retirement, whichever occurs first. This age limit ensures that the leadership of the Supreme Court remains dynamic, with the position being filled by the next most senior judge once the incumbent demits office. Should the office of the CJI become vacant due to retirement or other reasons, the President appoints the next senior-most judge of the Supreme Court.

Conclusion

The appointment of the Chief Justice of India is an evolving process, influenced by both constitutional provisions and judicial interpretations. While the principle of seniority remains a cornerstone of the selection process, the collegium system has provided a mechanism for greater transparency and collective decision-making. This system safeguards judicial independence by ensuring that appointments are made without undue influence from the executive. Ultimately, the independence and integrity of the judiciary depend on the consistent application of these norms, ensuring that the Chief Justice of India remains a symbol of impartiality and constitutional stewardship.