Karnataka High Court orders OLA to pay ₹5 lakh after driver's sexual harassment incident
The petitioner, who was subjected to the harassment, had initially approached OLA with her complaint, but the company's ICC declined to investigate.
The Karnataka High Court on Monday directed ANI Technologies, the parent company of OLA Cabs, to compensate a woman with ₹five lakh after she allegedly faced sexual harassment by one of their drivers during a trip in 2019. Justice M G S Kamal, presiding over a single-judge bench, also instructed OLA's Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) to initiate a proper inquiry in line with the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act).
The inquiry is to be concluded within 90 days, and a report must be submitted to the District Officer. Additionally, ANI Technologies has been ordered to pay ₹50,000 to cover the petitioner’s litigation expenses. The Court emphasised that all parties must comply with Section 16 of the POSH Act, ensuring confidentiality of the identities involved.
The Court had reserved its order on August 20. The petitioner, who was subjected to the harassment, had initially approached OLA with her complaint, but the company's ICC, following advice from external legal counsel, declined to investigate, claiming it lacked jurisdiction. The woman then sought relief from the High Court, requesting a directive for OLA to examine her complaint and for the Ministry of Women and Child Development to ensure the company adheres to POSH guidelines.
READ | Traffic jam turned dance party: Bengaluru woman joins street dancers in viral moment. Watch
She also urged the state to implement protective regulations for women and children using taxi services. The Court has further directed the Karnataka State Road Safety Authority to expedite its proceedings regarding the notice issued to ANI Technologies, with a deadline of 90 days for completion. The state government has been ordered to pay a penalty of ₹one lakh for failing to respond adequately to the petition.
READ | Mystery lights paint Bengaluru sky pink, yellow and green. They turned out to be…
During the proceedings, the petitioner’s counsel argued that OLA functions as a transport company, not merely a platform, and should bear responsibility for its drivers’ actions. The counsel for OLA, however, contended that the drivers are independent contractors, and not employees, and the company should not be held liable under labour laws.