The Supreme Court on Thursday directed the Centre and all the states and Union territories (UTs) to immediately appoint district officers under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act (POSH Act), lamenting that numerous states have tried to “force-fit” the institutional requirements of the law within their existing bureaucratic frameworks.
Directing principal secretaries concerned to personally ensure appointment of a district officer in each district within their territorial jurisdiction within four weeks, a bench, led by justice S Ravindra Bhat, held that a district officer is the most important functionary in the system, tasked with keeping the redressal and monitoring framework both intact, and smoothly running,
“The failure to notify district officers specifically, has a snowballing effect on appointment of the local committees (LCs) and nodal officers, in addition to other aspects. The complaint mechanism, and larger framework - no matter how effective, remain inadequate if the authorities set out in the Act, are not duly appointed or notified. Therefore, the state/UT governments must ensure that every district, at all times, have a notified district officer,” directed the bench, also comprising justice Dipankar Datta.
Citing the scheme of the POSH Act, the top court noted that the role of the district officer is pivotal. “They are responsible for numerous aspects in the implementation of the Act. It is where the buck stops, so to say, in terms of coordination and accountability relating to the POSH Act. Efforts have to be undertaken to orient, train and sensitise the district officers with regard to the provisions of the POSH Act and the rules, with an emphasis on their roles and obligations,” it added.
{{/usCountry}}Citing the scheme of the POSH Act, the top court noted that the role of the district officer is pivotal. “They are responsible for numerous aspects in the implementation of the Act. It is where the buck stops, so to say, in terms of coordination and accountability relating to the POSH Act. Efforts have to be undertaken to orient, train and sensitise the district officers with regard to the provisions of the POSH Act and the rules, with an emphasis on their roles and obligations,” it added.
{{/usCountry}}According to the bench, POSH rules should also be amended to clarify that district officers have the authority to collect fines from employers for failing to constitute internal or local committees for receiving the complaints of sexual harassment at workplace.
The directive came as the court heard a bunch of public interest litigation (PILs), seeking effective implementation of the POSH Act in the face of varying models of implementation and several loopholes in the implementation of the 2013 law.
For a workplace that employs less than 10 workers, the Act provides for an LC in each district, which is to be constituted by the district officer. The district officer is also tasked with designating a nodal officer in each block, taluka, and tehsil in rural or tribal area, and ward or municipality in the urban area, to receive complaints and forward the same to the concerned LC. The LC, after conducting inquiry, has to submit its report to the district officer and the employer, recommending action. The district officer is also entrusted with the task of forwarding a brief statement on the annual reports submitted by every employer in their jurisdiction to the government. An Internal Committee (IC) is to be set up under the law if the organization has 10 or more employees.
After perusing the replies filed by various states, the bench underlined that they are marked by a lack of uniformity in terms of implementation of the Act and further highlighted the many lacunae. While district officers were in most states notified only after the court issued notice in the case, the bench said, the replies were bereft of details of such officers, besides lack of information on LCs and nodal officers
“The information on annual reports is perhaps most alarming– only three have provided a consolidated report. Each state has notified a different ministry as the ‘nodal’ ministry for implementation of the Act – some have notified the social welfare ministry or its allied departments, while others rely on the women and child development department,” noted the bench, as it suggested that the Centre should amend the POSH rules to designate nodal authorities preferably in the women and child department.
The court also asked the Centre and states to consider making “anonymised data” from the annual compliance reports, collected by district offices containing information on the number of cases filed and their disposal within their jurisdiction.
“In the interest of transparency and good governance, they may consider making these statistics public– the access to which would certainly have a positive impact on various stakeholders. This in turn will also strengthen the monitoring of the implementation of this Act,” it said.
The court directed states and UTs to submit their reports on compliance with its directions to the Centre in eight weeks, and fixed the next hearing in February.