Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Legal framework for establishing multiple ICCs in the same workplace - The POSH Act primarily mandates that the employer shall constitute an ICC at each workplace, with specific procedural and compositional requirements outlined in Section 4. The Act emphasizes that the ICC should be located at every workplace to ensure accessible redressal mechanisms ["SHARANJEET KAUR Vs IDBI BANK LTD - Delhi"] ["X vs Akademi - 2025 0 Supreme(Del) 441"].
Single vs. multiple ICCs - The Act generally envisions one ICC per workplace, defined as a distinct establishment or unit. It does not explicitly prohibit the formation of more than one ICC within a larger organization or multiple workplaces, provided each ICC complies with the statutory requirements of Section 4 ["X vs Akademi - 2025 0 Supreme(Del) 441"]. However, the scheme does not contemplate multiple ICCs within the same individual workplace unless distinct workplaces are recognized.
Requirements for ICC composition - The ICC must be constituted by the employer, with members including a presiding officer who is a woman employed at the workplace and other members as prescribed, ensuring gender sensitivity and independence ["SHARANJEET KAUR Vs IDBI BANK LTD - Delhi"]. The composition must adhere strictly to Section 4, and any deviation, such as appointing non-compliant members, can invalidate the ICC's jurisdiction ["E. SHANAVAS KHAN vs THE KOLLAM BAR ASSOCIATION - Kerala"].
Jurisdiction and location - The Venue of Internal Complaint Committee must be at the workplace itself, reinforcing that each workplace should ideally have its own ICC to facilitate prompt and effective redressal ["SHARANJEET KAUR Vs IDBI BANK LTD - Delhi"]. When multiple workplaces exist, each should have its own ICC; however, the Act does not specify that multiple ICCs cannot operate within the same organization if they are at separate locations.
Special cases and organizational structures - In organizations functioning more like clubs or associations, the applicability of the POSH Act and the requirement for multiple ICCs depend on whether the entity is an establishment under the Act. If not, the organization may not be mandated to constitute ICCs ["E. Shanavas Khan, S/o. Ebrahim Kutty vs Kollam Bar Association, Represented By Its Secretary - Kerala"].
Procedural compliance and legal obligations - The constitution of ICCs must follow the prescribed composition and procedural rules. Failure to do so can lead to the ICC's recommendations being invalid or set aside ["THE REGIONAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA vs MANUKUMAR K.K. - Kerala"]. The Act also mandates that the ICC be located at each workplace to ensure accessibility ["SHARANJEET KAUR Vs IDBI BANK LTD - Delhi"].
Analysis and Conclusion:The POSH Act mandates the formation of an ICC at each workplace or establishment to ensure accessible redressal for sexual harassment complaints. While the Act emphasizes one ICC per workplace, it does not explicitly prohibit multiple ICCs within the same organization if there are multiple workplaces or units. Each ICC must be constituted in accordance with Section 4, with proper composition, location, and procedural adherence. Organizations functioning more like clubs or associations may not be required to constitute ICCs unless they qualify as establishments under the Act. Overall, the key requirement is compliance with the statutory composition and procedural rules for each ICC, ensuring effective and accessible mechanisms for women at each workplace ["E. Shanavas Khan, S/o. Ebrahim Kutty vs Kollam Bar Association, Represented By Its Secretary - Kerala"] ["E. SHANAVAS KHAN vs THE KOLLAM BAR ASSOCIATION - Kerala"] ["X vs Akademi - 2025 0 Supreme(Del) 441"] ["SHARANJEET KAUR Vs IDBI BANK LTD - Delhi"].
In today's workplaces, ensuring compliance with the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013—commonly known as the POSH Act—is crucial for fostering safe environments. Employers often grapple with questions about structuring Internal Complaints Committees (ICCs) effectively, especially in large organizations with multiple departments or branches. A common query arises: What are the legal requirements for establishing more than one ICC in the same workplace under the POSH Act?
This blog post dives deep into the statutory framework, judicial interpretations, and practical considerations to clarify this issue. While the POSH Act aims to provide a robust mechanism for addressing sexual harassment complaints, it emphasizes a streamlined approach to avoid confusion and ensure accountability.
The POSH Act mandates that every employer must constitute an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) at their workplace to handle sexual harassment complaints. Section 4 explicitly requires the formation of a single ICC comprising a presiding officer (a senior woman employee), at least two employees committed to women's causes, and one external member from an NGO or association focused on women's issues or sexual harassment prevention. Initiatives for Inclusion Foundation VS Union Of India - 2023 0 Supreme(SC) 1062Somaya Gupta vs Jawaharlal Nehru University - Delhi (2018)
Main Legal Finding: The POSH Act does not contemplate multiple ICCs within the same workplace. Instead, it promotes a unified committee to manage all complaints efficiently. Establishing more than one ICC could lead to overlapping jurisdictions, inconsistent decisions, and diluted responsibility, undermining the Act's objectives. X vs Akademi - 2025 0 Supreme(Del) 441
Key statutory points include:- Single Constitution Requirement: Employers must set up one ICC for the entire workplace, regardless of size or departmental divisions. X vs Akademi - 2025 0 Supreme(Del) 441- Defined Composition and Independence: The ICC must maintain autonomy, with members selected to ensure impartiality and expertise. Initiatives for Inclusion Foundation VS Union Of India - 2023 0 Supreme(SC) 1062Somaya Gupta vs Jawaharlal Nehru University - Delhi (2018)- No Provision for Multiples: Neither the Act nor its Rules (POSH Rules, 2013) permit or envision simultaneous multiple ICCs, as this would complicate compliance. X vs Akademi - 2025 0 Supreme(Del) 441
The language of Section 4(1) uses singular terms like constitute an Internal Complaints Committee, signaling a deliberate design for unity. Courts have reinforced this by stressing the need for a streamlined grievance redressal mechanism to prevent fragmentation. Somaya Gupta vs Jawaharlal Nehru University - Delhi (2018)
In large organizations, a single ICC can cover multiple units by having broad jurisdiction, ensuring centralized handling while maintaining efficiency.
Court rulings consistently uphold the POSH Act's emphasis on properly constituted, singular ICCs with wide jurisdiction. For instance, in a case challenging ICC jurisdiction across departments, the court affirmed that the jurisdiction of the Internal Complaints Committee under the POSH Act extends beyond the respondent's workplace, allowing for inquiries at the aggrieved woman's workplace. Sohail Malik VS Union Of India - 2025 Supreme(SC) 2031 This broad interpretation supports one ICC handling complaints organization-wide, rejecting narrow departmental limits.
Another judgment highlighted the ICC's role in government settings, noting that the procedure followed was as prescribed under CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 and applicable to the petitioner in terms of amended Prevention of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013. Surender Singh VS Union of India - 2023 Supreme(Del) 3441 It stressed fair inquiries without rigid multi-step procedures, underscoring the need for a single, competent body.
In educational institutions, courts have invalidated flawed inquiries due to procedural lapses, directing fresh probes under a properly constituted ICC—implicitly one per workplace. Anandh Subramaniam vs Union of India - 2025 Supreme(All) 2350 Similarly, delays or re-examinations by multiple committees were criticized as causing undue harassment, emphasizing timely, unified processes. P VS Union of India - 2023 Supreme(Del) 1858
Challenges to ICC constitution often fail if the committee adheres to Section 4, as seen in cases upholding jurisdiction despite bias claims: The constitution of the Internal Complaints Committee is valid, and its jurisdiction is upheld despite the petitioner's claims. PROF. (DR.) J. SUNDARESAN PILLAI vs DR. K.K. SEETHALAKSHMI - 2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 72 Courts also clarify that ICCs recommend actions but lack punitive powers, reinforcing their role as a singular advisory body. Hareesh M. S, S/o Madhavan Nair K. VS Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd - 2025 Supreme(Ker) 107
Natural justice remains paramount; denials of hearing rights lead to quashed reports and fresh inquiries by the same ICC. Nihar Prasad Sharma VS Numaligarh Refinery Limited - 2024 Supreme(Gau) 1813 In service matters, writs against ICCs are often directed to tribunals, affirming statutory compliance with one committee. S. Ravi Selvan VS Central Board of Indirect Taxes & customs, Represented by the Chairman, New Delhi - 2022 Supreme(Mad) 3501
These precedents illustrate that while jurisdiction can span workplaces or departments, multiplicity within one is unsupported. X vs Akademi - 2025 0 Supreme(Del) 441
The POSH Act provides for Local Complaints Committees (LCCs) for unorganized sectors or small workplaces (under 10 employees), but not additional ICCs in larger setups. PROF. (DR.) J. SUNDARESAN PILLAI vs DR. K.K. SEETHALAKSHMI - 2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 72 For distinct workplaces (e.g., separate branches), separate ICCs may be needed, but not within the same workplace as defined under Section 2(o), which includes interconnected premises, departments, or virtual spaces.
In multi-employer scenarios or campuses, a single ICC often suffices with extended reach. No exceptions explicitly allow multiples in one workplace.
To stay compliant:- Constitute One Robust ICC: Follow Section 4 precisely, including annual reconstitution if needed.- Train and Empower: Ensure members are trained on inquiry procedures, natural justice, and confidentiality.- Handle Multi-Department Workplaces: Designate the ICC to cover all units; conduct regular audits.- Document Policies: Clearly state in handbooks that one ICC handles all complaints to avoid confusion.- Seek Legal Review: For complex structures (e.g., subsidiaries), consult experts to confirm 'workplace' boundaries.
If complaints arise across sites, forward findings appropriately, as courts endorse. Sohail Malik VS Union Of India - 2025 Supreme(SC) 2031
Generally, the POSH Act does not support more than one ICC in the same workplace, favoring a unified, independent committee for consistent redressal. This approach aligns with judicial trends emphasizing efficiency, fairness, and broad jurisdiction. X vs Akademi - 2025 0 Supreme(Del) 441Initiatives for Inclusion Foundation VS Union Of India - 2023 0 Supreme(SC) 1062Somaya Gupta vs Jawaharlal Nehru University - Delhi (2018)
Key Takeaways:- Mandate: One ICC per workplace.- Benefits: Streamlined processes, accountability.- Risks of Multiples: Non-compliance, legal challenges.
This post provides general insights based on the POSH Act and case law; it is not legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for organization-specific guidance.
#POSHAct #WorkplaceHarassment #ICCRules
It is further contended that the Bar Association has no legal obligation to constitute an ICC since it employs only one woman employee. ... The Act also covers women who approach a workplace for employment purposes. Hence, the 3rd respondent has every right to approach the ICC under the PoSH Act. ... Therefore, the constitution of the ICC by the first respondent is itself against the objective and specific requirements#HL_....
The Act also covers women who approach a workplace for employment purposes. Hence, the 3rd respondent has every right to approach the ICC under the PoSH Act. ... Therefore, the constitution of the ICC by the first respondent is itself against the objective and specific requirements of Section 4 of the PoSH Act. Consequently, the report submitted by the ICC (Ext. ... It is further contended that the Bar Association ....
him by the aggrieved woman and not the ICC constituted at the workplace of the aggrieved woman under the provisions of the POSH Act. ... The POSH Act does not merely punish acts of sexual harassment, but actively imposes a legal duty on employers to prohibit and prevent harassment, it ensures that the women in each workplace have open access to a mechanism for redressal of complaints of sexual harassment in the form of ICC. ... the ....
The composition of the ICC shall be as contemplated under section 4 of the POSH Act. The ICC shall adhere to the procedural requirements as contemplated under the statute and the rules framed thereunder. ... Further POSH Act describes the composition and characteristics of the ICC and under the head of “Venue of Internal Complaint Committee” it is specifically mentioned that "The Internal Complaint Committee should be located at all workpla....
In terms of Section 4(i) of the Act, it is the employer who is required to constitute an ICC at the workplace. ... As per the scheme of POSH Act there can be only one Employer 76. The statutory framework of the POSH Act does not contemplate multiple “employers” within a single organisation. ... The POSH Act defines the term “employer” and “workplace” with width to include the head of every branch....
Further one must be with legal background/knowledge of the law, and one must belong to a Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe, or Other Backward Class. ... (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 read with the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Rules, 2013 [hereafter “Act/POSH Act” or “Act” and “Rules/POSH Rules” respectively]. ... 6[Section 6(2) of the P....
The petitioner has submitted that in the present case as well, on receipt of the sexual harassment complaint dated 18.10.2022, DG CRPF referred it to ICC in accordance with Section 4 of the POSH Act, 2013. ... Therefore, the procedure followed was as prescribed under CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 and applicable to the petitioner in terms of amended Prevention of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as `POSH Act, 2013') and the Rules fram....
This complaint, which is one dated 24.06.2022, was submitted by the complainant to the Presiding Officer, ICC, constituted for the IIT under the PoSH Act. ... PoSH Act. ... So far as the first issue is concerned, there is little doubt that the inquiry here is one under the PoSH Act. Section 11 of the PoSH Act reads: “11. Inquiry into complaint. ... under the PoSH Act#H....
The ICC of IFL was formed on 30th July, 2019 and proceedings were initiated under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (hereinafter as 'POSH Act') against the Respondent No.4. ... In POSH related complaints and matters, the constitution of the ICC is of utmost importance and the same has to be in accordance with the provisions of the Act. ... that IFL may be directed to redress as per the Sexua....
Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (for short 'POSH Act') by the respondents 4 and 5 and as such the proceedings by the ICC cannot be said to be without jurisdiction. ... ICC is to be constituted under Section 4 of the POSH Act. LCC is constituted under Section 6 of the POSH Act. ... On the previous day, 27.11.2024, a complaint had been lodged by one#....
10. I have considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the learned counsel for the parties. 8. ICC is only empowered to recommend if it finds the behaviour of the employee amounts to sexual harassment at workplace under the provisions of Sexual Harassment of Women at workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 [hereinafter referred to as POSH Act, 2013]. The ICC does not have the power to impose any punishment. If the ICC finds that the complaint has no substance, it cannot impose punishment for a false complaint. However, the power to decide whether an allegat....
Section 4 provides for ‘constitution of internal complaints committee’ (‘ICC’ for short) and its power. When Internal Complaint Committee (ICC) report in terms of ‘the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (PoSH Act) runs contrary to prosecution case, whether the same alone is a reason to quash the entire criminal proceedings otherwise, by invoking power under Section 528 of BNSS?8. In this connection it is preferable to refer PoSH Act which came into force with effect from 09.12. 7. Since the learned counsel for the petit....
9. Per contra, vehemently opposing this writ petition, the learned senior counsel for the respondent No. 1 to 4 has submitted that the petitioner would get a full and reasonable opportunity for defending himself in the disciplinary proceedings that has been initiated against him and he would also get a reasonable opportunity to cross-examine the management witnesses and to give his defence evidence. Therefore, the principles of natural justice would be fully complied with. 12. The learned legal aid counsel has also vehemently opposed the prayers made in this writ petition and has also submit....
The petitioner and the fourth respondent (Complainant) both fall under the umbrella of the CBIC and therefore, they did share a common workplace which comes within the definition of Section 2(o) of the POSH Act, 2013. (c) The contentions of the petitioner are premature. Section 3 of the POSH Act, also makes it clear that any women who is subject to sexual harassment in any workplace may give a complaint and there is no reference to common workplace in the statute; The complaint is one of sexual harassment and there is no direct nexus to the complaint and the alleged scam in....
To achieve that end, the requirement under law with respect to the qualification of the independent member on the ICC is an indispensable necessity for meting out justice under the Workplace Harassment Prohibition Act. This court in U.S. Verma, Principal and Delhi Public School Society vs. National Commission for Women and Others, (2009) 163 DLT 557 (delivered by the author of this judgment), held that the entire thrust of the complaints committee procedure and its underlying premise is that the complainant employees are assured objectivity and neutrality in the inquiry, in....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
