Supreme Court Reviews Nationwide Compliance of POSH Act and Environmental Regulations

Why in the News?

The Supreme Court of India has sought detailed reports from High Courts, States, and Union Territories on the implementation of the POSH Act, 2013, highlighting gaps in the constitution of Internal Complaints Committees and gender-sensitive mechanisms across judicial and workplace institutions. This review also touches upon aspects of environmental jurisprudence, as workplace safety increasingly encompasses considerations for a pollution free environment, including the need for environmental clearances and compliance with the Forest Conservation Act.

Supreme Court’s Intervention on POSH Implementation:

• The Supreme Court, through two separate benches, took cognisance of inadequate enforcement of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, while also considering the broader context of environmental regulations and the ex post facto approval of projects.
• A Bench led by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna issued notices to all High Courts, seeking status reports on whether Gender Sensitisation and Internal Complaints Committees (GSICC) have been constituted, emphasizing the need for environmental clearance in workplace safety protocols.
• The court specifically sought information regarding High Courts, district courts, subordinate courts, tribunals, bar associations, and allied judicial bodies, highlighting the importance of creating a pollution free environment in these institutions.
• The intervention followed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Geeta Rani, which highlighted the absence of gender-sensitive complaint-handling structures in many judicial forums, drawing parallels to the Vanashakti judgment that emphasized the importance of environmental considerations in decision-making processes.
• The petition argued that such gaps lead to constitutional violations, discourage women and transgender persons from accessing justice, and weaken workplace dignity in the legal ecosystem, underscoring the importance of environmental democracy in ensuring equitable access to justice and a pollution free environment.

Gaps Identified Across Courts and States

• In a parallel proceeding, a Bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan examined compliance with POSH provisions across States and Union Territories, while also considering the broader implications of environmental regulations such as the Coastal Regulation Zone notifications.
• The court was informed that despite repeated directions, many public and private establishments have failed to constitute Internal Complaints Committees (ICCs), a situation reminiscent of the challenges faced in implementing environmental safeguards and obtaining timely environmental clearances.
• Several States and UTs were also found lacking in appointing District Officers and Nodal Officers, essential for effective reporting and redressal mechanisms, highlighting the need for a more comprehensive approach that includes environmental considerations and the polluter pays principle.
• Senior Advocate Sonia Mathur, appearing for the petitioner, informed the court that seven High Courts have not framed rules for GSICC formation, drawing attention to similar gaps in environmental governance and the implementation of the precautionary principle.
• Additionally, district courts under Delhi, Punjab & Haryana High Courts were flagged for incomplete compliance, raising questions about the broader implementation of environmental regulations and the EIA notification.
• The Supreme Court directed that the compiled status report be shared with all States and UTs and sought their responses within three weeks, emphasizing the need for a holistic approach to workplace safety that includes both gender sensitivity and environmental considerations.