Appellate Authority Under POSH Act Can Stay Final Report Of Internal Complaints Committee Pending Final Decision: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court has held that there is no express bar under provisions of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 and Rules, for the appellate authority to consider an application for stay in appeal against the final report of the Internal Complaints Committee.
A single judge bench of Justice S Sunil Dutt Yadav said “The appellate authority despite the absence of specific provision for granting of interim order would have the power to consider the interim application.”
Petitioner Nagaraj G K had approached the court questioning the correctness of the final report of the internal committee based on which he came to be transferred.
It was submitted that the Authority had merely issued notice on his appeal, without considering grant of interim order, due to lack of power under Section 18 of POSH Act and under Rule 11 of the Rules, 2013. However, he contended that unless the application for stay is considered, cases where genuine grievances are raised would remain unaddressed till the appeal is decided- which may take time.
At the outset, the Court noted that the provisions under the Act and the Rules do not contain any stipulation regarding grant of interim relief. It must be noticed however, it said, "that the Act does not expressly prohibit the appellate authority to pass an interim order and once the appellate authority has the power to set aside impugned proceedings, it can be construed that the appellate authority also has implied power to consider passing of interim order of stay as well.”
Noting that the court cannot exercise its inherent power in conflict with what has been specifically provided under the Statute, it observed, “When there is no such bar in regard to grant of interim relief under the statute, such power to grant interim relief could be considered.”
Placing reliance on Supreme Court judgement in the case of Income Tax Officer, Cannanore vs. M K Mohammed Kunhi (1968), the court disposed of the petition directing the Appellate Authority to consider Petitioner's request.
Such consideration of the interim relief must be made within an outer limit of two weeks, it ordered.
Appearance: Advocate Nagaraja Hegde for Petitioner.
AGA Navya Shekar for R1.
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 466
Case Title: Nagaraj G K AND THE HON'BLE ADDL. LABOUR COMMISSIONER & Others
Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 28361 OF 2024