On May 21, 2025, the Supreme Court sought a status report[1] on compliance by various States and Union Territories to the implementation of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) following the judgement passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Aureliano Fernandes v. State of Goa and Others.[2]
Background:
The judgement which was pronounced in 2023, involved a lecturer at Goa University accused of sexual harassment. An internal inquiry was conducted by the university, leading to the appellant’s termination. The Bombay High Court upheld this decision. However, the Supreme Court found that the inquiry was conducted in a “tearing hurry” with insufficient opportunity for the appellant to participate, which was deemed contrary to the principles of natural justice. The Supreme Court quashed the High Court’s judgment and remitted the matter for a fresh inquiry.[3]
Supreme Court’s Directives on POSH Act Implementation
Flowing from observations of lapses in POSH Act enforcement, the Supreme Court issued several directives to ensure stricter adherence:
- Establishment and Audit of LCs/ICs: Central and State Governments, and Union Territories, must conduct timely audits to ensure that all relevant government ministries, departments, organizations, agencies, public sector bodies, institutions, and entities have established Local Committees (LCs) and Internal Committees (ICs) as required by the Act, and that their composition is in strict accordance with the Act’s guidelines.
- Information Accessibility: Entities must ensure that necessary information regarding the constitution and composition of LCs/ICs, including contact details, online complaint procedures, and relevant policies, is readily available and regularly updated on their websites.
- Training and Sensitization: Officials, leaders, and employers are required to take swift action to train LC/IC members on their responsibilities and investigation procedures. Regular orientation programs, workshops, seminars, and awareness programs are to be conducted to upskill members and educate women employees about the POSH Act provisions.
Status of Compliance (as of May 21, 2025)
The Amicus Curiae’s Status Report highlights varying levels of compliance across States and Union Territories:
- Appointment of District Officers: Most States and Union Territories have reported compliance in appointing District Officers under Section 5 of the POSH Act.
- Constitution of Local Complaints Committees (LCCs): Most States have constituted LCCs, but the extent of actual compliance is unclear for Delhi, Haryana (missing details for 3 districts), Jharkhand (LCCs reported in 22 out of 24 districts), and Kerala.
- Constitution of Internal Complaints Committees (ICCs): While most States have issued directions for ICC formation and reconstitution, the extent of constitution in private establishments requires more comprehensive surveying. States like Maharashtra and Gujarat have adopted effective survey formats that others are encouraged to follow. However, there were concerns over the accuracy or completeness of data from several states, and some have not provided district-level survey information.
- Appointment of Nodal Officers: Most States have appointed Nodal Officers specifically under Section 6(2) of the Act. However, clarity is needed for several States and Union Territories regarding whether these appointments are specifically under this section.
The matter is adjourned to August 12, 2025, to allow for further compliance and completion of surveys. Furthermore, the Court mandated an updated list of District Officers, to be verified by the States and Union Territories and provided to National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) for publication, within four weeks.
[1] https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/supreme-court-revives-fir-against-bank-manager-in-gold-misappropriation-case-294615
[2] Civil Appeal No. 2482 of 2014
[3] Ibid.