Court Declares Bar Association's ICC Formation Invalid; Emphasizes Jurisdictional Limitations of PoSH Act
In a landmark judgment delivered on January 27, 2026, the Kerala High Court, presided by Justice P.M. Manoj, ruled against the Kollam Bar Association's formation of an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013. This judgment came as a result of a writ petition filed by E. Shanavas Khan challenging the ICC's jurisdiction and the subsequent suspension order against him.
The case revolved around a complaint of sexual harassment filed by a member of the Kollam Bar Association against Shanavas Khan, which allegedly occurred at Khan's residence used for professional purposes. The Bar Association, in response to the complaint, constituted an ICC to investigate the matter, which later led to Khan's suspension based on the committee's findings.
The court critically examined whether the Bar Association could be considered an "employer" under the PoSH Act and whether the incident location qualified as a "workplace." Justice Manoj clarified that the Bar Association does not meet the definition of an employer as outlined in Section 2(g) of the PoSH Act. Consequently, the formation of an ICC by the Bar Association was deemed beyond its jurisdiction.
Furthermore, the judgment highlighted the distinction between private residences and workplaces under the PoSH Act. The court noted that a private residence used for professional purposes does not automatically qualify as a workplace unless it exhibits characteristics akin to an office or professional establishment.
The court also addressed the maintainability of the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, affirming that the Bar Association, though not a "State" under Article 12, is amenable to writ jurisdiction in matters concerning statutory compliance, such as the PoSH Act.
In conclusion, Justice Manoj set aside the ICC's report, declaring it legally invalid due to the improper constitution of the committee. The judgment emphasized the necessity for adherence to statutory mandates and jurisdictional boundaries under the PoSH Act. The court refrained from delving into the factual merits of the alleged incident, leaving those aspects open for future determination.
This ruling sets a significant precedent concerning the applicability of the PoSH Act within professional associations and the interpretation of "workplace" in cases involving private residences used for professional activities.
Bottom Line:
Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 - Bar Association cannot be treated as an "employer" under the PoSH Act, and hence, formation of an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) by the Bar Association is without jurisdiction. A private residence used for professional purposes may not strictly qualify as a "workplace" under the PoSH Act.
Statutory provision(s): Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 Sections 2(a), 2(o), 4; Constitution of India, 1950 Article 226.
E. Shanavas Khan v. Kollam Bar Association, (Kerala) : Law Finder Doc id # 2845324
