The Kerala High Court (Ernakulam Bench) has held that the Kollam Bar Association had no legal authority to constitute an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) under the provisions of the POSH Act. The Court’s reasoning was based on a strict interpretation of Section 4 of the POSH Act which explicitly mandates that “every employer of a workplace” shall constitute an ICC.
The Court examined the definition of “employer” under Section 2(g) and concluded that a Bar Association, which is a professional body for advocates, does not fit within the statutory definition of an “employer” as it does not have an employer-employee relationship with its members. Therefore, the fundamental condition required by Section 4 for the formation of an ICC, that it must be constituted by an employer, was not met by the Bar Association.
In light of its findings, the Court held that the constitution of the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) by the Kollam Bar Association was contrary to the specific requirements of Section 4 of the POSH Act. As a direct consequence, the Court ruled that the inquiry report submitted by this unlawfully constituted committee had no legal basis and must be set aside.
A Single Judge Bench of Justice P.M. Manoj observed that while Bar Associations are not explicitly mentioned in the Advocates Act, 1961, they are recognized under the Kerala Advocates Welfare Fund Act, 1980, and the court has previously intervened in their affairs. Crucially, since the challenge pertained to the illegal formation of a committee under a central statute (the POSH Act), the Bench affirmed its jurisdiction to entertain the petition.
Briefly, the petitioner, a senior advocate, and the 3rd respondent, a junior advocate, are both members of the Kollam Bar Association (the 1st respondent). The 3rd respondent filed a complaint with the Bar Association alleging an act of sexual harassment by the petitioner at his residence, which she visited for the notarisation of a document. A separate criminal complaint was also filed, resulting in the registration of an FIR against the petitioner.
Based on the 3rd respondent’s complaint, the President of the Bar Association constituted an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) under Section 4 of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act). This ICC conducted an inquiry, submitted a report, and the Bar Association subsequently suspended the petitioner from its membership. The petitioner challenged the legality of the ICC’s constitution, its report, and the resulting suspension through the present petition.
Appearances:
Senior Advocate S. Sreekumar, along with Advocates S. Navas, K. Vijayan, Namitha Rajesh, and Nithya V.D., for the Petitioner
Advocates K. Siju, T.S. Maya, C.M. Mohammed Iquabal, S. Abhilash, Anjana Kannath, Mariya Jose, Istinaf Abdullah, Shehsad A.S., P. Abdul Nishad, Dhilna Dileep, Thasneem A.P., and K.A. Sunitha, for the Respondent
