{"id":353659,"date":"2025-07-17T12:30:50","date_gmt":"2025-07-17T07:00:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=353659"},"modified":"2025-07-21T09:59:16","modified_gmt":"2025-07-21T04:29:16","slug":"bom-hc-advocates-not-covered-under-posh-act-not-employees-of-bar-council","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/bom-hc-advocates-not-covered-under-posh-act-not-employees-of-bar-council\/","title":{"rendered":"Advocates are not Bar Council employees, hence outside the ambit of POSH Act: Bombay High Court"},"content":{"rendered":"<div style=\"text-align: justify; line-height: 150%;\">\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Bombay High Court:<\/span> The UNS Women Legal Association filed the instant Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking formation of permanent internal grievance committee of women advocates in all State Bar Council offices and all Bar Associations of Maharashtra. The Division Bench of Alok Aradhe, C.J. and Sandeep V. Marne, J., while disposing of the PIL, observed that the provisions of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002829234\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013<\/a> (\u2018POSH Act\u2019) does not apply to advocates as the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002829234\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">POSH Act<\/a> requires an employer-employee relationship, which does not exist between advocates and the Bar Council of Maharashtra &amp; Goa (\u2018BCMG\u2019).<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The petitioner association, a registered society under the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002919602\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Societies Registration Act, 1860<\/a>, sought direction from the Bar Council of India (\u2018BCI\u2019) as well as BCMG to form a Permanent Internal Grievance Committee of women advocates in all State Bar Council offices and all Bar Associations of Maharashtra. The petitioner relied on the Supreme Court\u2019s directives in <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">Medha Kotwal Lele v. Union of India<\/span>, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/R5j0z8E3\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">(2013) 1 SCC 297<\/a> and the provisions of the POSH Act for the constitution of Internal Complaints Committee.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court referred to <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan<\/span>, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/Members\/SearchResult.aspx?documentLink=JTXT-0000024901\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">(1997) 6 SCC 241<\/a>, wherein the Supreme Court recognized the right of working women against sexual harassment at workplace. The Court also referred to <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">Megha Kotwal Lele<\/span> (supra), in which the Supreme Court issued specific guidelines for the formation and effective implementation of women&#8217;s committees at all State Bar Councils and the Bar Council of India, and subsequent to this, the POSH Act was enacted, which prevented sexual harassment of women at the workplace, as it violated women\u2019s right to equality, life, and liberty.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court also analysed Sections 2(f), 2(g), 4, and 6 of the POSH Act and observed that these provisions applied where the relationship of employer and employee existed. Since neither the Bar Council of India nor the Bar Council of Maharashtra &amp; Goa could be said to be the employer of advocates, the provisions of the POSH Act did not apply insofar as they pertained to advocates. The Court, however, clarified that the provisions of the POSH Act would apply to employees of the BCI and BCMG.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court pointed out that the Advocates Act already provided a redressal mechanism for grievances raised by women advocates, specifically, under Section 35 of the Advocates Act, wherein the Bar Council has been empowered to take disciplinary action against advocates not only for professional misconduct but also for other forms of misconduct. The Court, therefore disposed of the present PIL without passing any further orders.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">[<span style=\"font-weight: bold; color: #632423;\">UNS Women Legal Association v. Bar Council of India, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/0LRfO3re\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">2025 SCC OnLine Bom 2647<\/a>, decided on 7-7-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p>Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 18pt;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">For the Respondents:<\/span> Shekhar Jagtap with Sairuchita Chowdhary &#8211; Respondent 1 &#8211; Bar Council of India<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 18pt;\">Milind Sathe, Senior Advocate with Meghna Gowalani i\/by Mr. Yogendra Rajgor &#8211; Respondent 2-Bar Council of Maharashtra &amp; Goa<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 18pt;\">Jyoti Chavan, Addl. Govt. Pleader with Fatima Lakadawala, AGP &#8211; Respondent 4 &#8211; State.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p style=\"font-style: italic;\">&#8220;It is evident that the provisions of the POSH Act apply where the relationship of employer and employee exists, thus, neither Bar Council of India nor Bar Council of Maharashtra &amp; Goa can be said to be employer of advocates.&#8221;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":353665,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[12381,2569,71838,44522,67670,43269,85448,85447,85449,44393],"class_list":["post-353659","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-bar-council-of-india","tag-Bombay_High_Court","tag-chief-justice-alok-aradhe","tag-internal-complaints-committee","tag-justice-sandeep-v-marne","tag-posh-act","tag-redressal-forum","tag-section-35-advocates-act-1961","tag-uns-women-legal-association","tag-workplace-harassment"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Advocates not covered under POSH Act: Bom HC | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Advocates not covered under POSH Act as Bar Council is not Employer: Bombay HC.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/bom-hc-advocates-not-covered-under-posh-act-not-employees-of-bar-council\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Advocates are not Bar Council employees, hence outside the ambit of POSH Act: Bombay High Court\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Advocates not covered under POSH Act as Bar Council is not Employer: Bombay HC.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/bom-hc-advocates-not-covered-under-posh-act-not-employees-of-bar-council\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-07-17T07:00:50+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-07-21T04:29:16+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Advocates-not-covered-under-POSH-Act.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Advocates are not Bar Council employees, hence outside the ambit of POSH Act: Bombay High Court\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/bom-hc-advocates-not-covered-under-posh-act-not-employees-of-bar-council\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/bom-hc-advocates-not-covered-under-posh-act-not-employees-of-bar-council\/\",\"name\":\"Advocates not covered under POSH Act: Bom HC | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/bom-hc-advocates-not-covered-under-posh-act-not-employees-of-bar-council\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/bom-hc-advocates-not-covered-under-posh-act-not-employees-of-bar-council\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Advocates-not-covered-under-POSH-Act.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-07-17T07:00:50+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-07-21T04:29:16+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Advocates not covered under POSH Act as Bar Council is not Employer: Bombay HC.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/bom-hc-advocates-not-covered-under-posh-act-not-employees-of-bar-council\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/bom-hc-advocates-not-covered-under-posh-act-not-employees-of-bar-council\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/bom-hc-advocates-not-covered-under-posh-act-not-employees-of-bar-council\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Advocates-not-covered-under-POSH-Act.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Advocates-not-covered-under-POSH-Act.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"Advocates not covered under POSH Act\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/bom-hc-advocates-not-covered-under-posh-act-not-employees-of-bar-council\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Advocates are not Bar Council employees, hence outside the ambit of POSH Act: Bombay High Court\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Advocates not covered under POSH Act: Bom HC | SCC Times","description":"Advocates not covered under POSH Act as Bar Council is not Employer: Bombay HC.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/bom-hc-advocates-not-covered-under-posh-act-not-employees-of-bar-council\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Advocates are not Bar Council employees, hence outside the ambit of POSH Act: Bombay High Court","og_description":"Advocates not covered under POSH Act as Bar Council is not Employer: Bombay HC.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/bom-hc-advocates-not-covered-under-posh-act-not-employees-of-bar-council\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-07-17T07:00:50+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-07-21T04:29:16+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Advocates-not-covered-under-POSH-Act.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Advocates are not Bar Council employees, hence outside the ambit of POSH Act: Bombay High Court","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/bom-hc-advocates-not-covered-under-posh-act-not-employees-of-bar-council\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/bom-hc-advocates-not-covered-under-posh-act-not-employees-of-bar-council\/","name":"Advocates not covered under POSH Act: Bom HC | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/bom-hc-advocates-not-covered-under-posh-act-not-employees-of-bar-council\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/bom-hc-advocates-not-covered-under-posh-act-not-employees-of-bar-council\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Advocates-not-covered-under-POSH-Act.webp","datePublished":"2025-07-17T07:00:50+00:00","dateModified":"2025-07-21T04:29:16+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Advocates not covered under POSH Act as Bar Council is not Employer: Bombay HC.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/bom-hc-advocates-not-covered-under-posh-act-not-employees-of-bar-council\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/bom-hc-advocates-not-covered-under-posh-act-not-employees-of-bar-council\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/bom-hc-advocates-not-covered-under-posh-act-not-employees-of-bar-council\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Advocates-not-covered-under-POSH-Act.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Advocates-not-covered-under-POSH-Act.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"Advocates not covered under POSH Act"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/17\/bom-hc-advocates-not-covered-under-posh-act-not-employees-of-bar-council\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Advocates are not Bar Council employees, hence outside the ambit of POSH Act: Bombay High Court"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Advocates-not-covered-under-POSH-Act.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":292154,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/05\/14\/sexual-harassment-of-women-at-workplace-sc-directions-to-implement-posh-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":353659,"position":0},"title":"Sexual Harassment at workplace: \u201cAssure women safe &#038; secure workplace or they will fear stepping out\u201d; SC issues directions for PoSH Act implementation","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"May 14, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Supreme Court attributed the reluctance on the part of victims of Sexual Harassment at workplace to report the misconduct to, (i) uncertainty about who to approach under the Act for redressal of their grievance; and (ii) lack of confidence in the process and its outcome.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"sexual harassment of women at workplace","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/sexual-harassment-of-women-at-workplace.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/sexual-harassment-of-women-at-workplace.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/sexual-harassment-of-women-at-workplace.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/sexual-harassment-of-women-at-workplace.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":375166,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/09\/bar-association-not-employer-under-posh-act-ker-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":353659,"position":1},"title":"Bar Association not &#8217;employer&#8217; under POSH Act: Kerala HC sets aside Internal Complaint Committee&#8217;s report on alleged harassment","author":"Sunaina","date":"February 9, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe term \u2018employer\u2019 means someone who exercises control over a workplace in the context of an employment relationship and discharges contractual obligations towards employees.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Bar Association is not employer","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/Bar-Association-is-not-employer.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/Bar-Association-is-not-employer.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/Bar-Association-is-not-employer.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/Bar-Association-is-not-employer.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":276542,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/03\/posh-delhi-high-court-baffling-to-see-that-a-law-graduate-himself-demands-assistance-of-person-with-legal-background-for-enquiry-before-icc\/","url_meta":{"origin":353659,"position":2},"title":"[POSH] Delhi High Court | Baffling to see that a law graduate himself demands assistance of person with legal background for enquiry before Internal Complaints Committee","author":"Editor","date":"November 3, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"If the Court would allow such an interpretation, then this provision would become redundant, and a floodgate of law graduates, who may not be enrolled with the bar councils to become an \u2018advocate\u2019 but are still practicing law, would pour in. The purpose of keeping the proceedings fact-based and free\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"competitive exam","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court-1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court-1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court-1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":270774,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/28\/whether-s-5-limitation-act-1963-apply-to-appeals-under-s-18-of-posh-act-2013-delhi-high-court-answers\/","url_meta":{"origin":353659,"position":3},"title":"Whether S. 5 Limitation Act, 1963 apply to appeals under S. 18 of POSH Act, 2013? Delhi High Court answers","author":"Editor","date":"July 28, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Delhi High Court: C Hari Shankar, J. opined that Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 will apply in respect of appeals preferred under Section 18 Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition & Redressal), Act 2013 (\u2018POSH Act') because if a Court were to refuse to\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":336749,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/12\/06\/sc-issues-notice-on-pil-for-security-tenure-protection-posh-members\/","url_meta":{"origin":353659,"position":4},"title":"Supreme Court issues notice on PIL for security of tenure &amp; protection to POSH Committee members in private sector","author":"Editor","date":"December 6, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The PIL raised concerns that members of Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) [constituted under Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act, 2013] do not have protection from arbitrary and retaliatory actions such as arbitrary termination at private workplaces.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Hot Off The Press&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Hot Off The Press","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/news\/hot_off_the_press\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Protection of POSH\u2019s ICC members","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/Protection-of-POSHs-ICC-members.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/Protection-of-POSHs-ICC-members.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/Protection-of-POSHs-ICC-members.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/Protection-of-POSHs-ICC-members.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":352556,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/05\/delhi-hc-launches-sexual-harassment-complaint-portal\/","url_meta":{"origin":353659,"position":5},"title":"Empowering Women at Work: Delhi High Court Launches Portal for Workplace Sexual Harassment Complaints","author":"Editor","date":"July 5, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The portal is meant to provide a dedicated platform for filing and addressing complaints of sexual harassment of women within the precincts of the Delhi High Court in a safe, secure, and confidential manner.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Hot Off The Press&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Hot Off The Press","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/news\/hot_off_the_press\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi HC Portal for Workplace Sexual Harassment Complaints","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/shared-image-2025-07-05T201607.430.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/shared-image-2025-07-05T201607.430.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/shared-image-2025-07-05T201607.430.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/shared-image-2025-07-05T201607.430.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/353659","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=353659"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/353659\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/353665"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=353659"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=353659"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=353659"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}