The Madras High Court has emphasised that the Centre as well as the State government are bound to monitor the implementation of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act of 2013 and maintain data regarding the number of complaints filed and disposed of.
First Division Bench of Chief Justice Sanjay V. Gangapurwala and Justice J. Sathya Narayana Prasad pointed out that Section 23 of the Act imposes such an obligation on the Centre with respect to workplaces owned, financed or controlled by it and on the State government with respect to all other workplaces.
“The appropriate government is bound to adhere to the mandate of the law. In case dereliction is found, then certainly the aggrieved person can make a complaint to the appropriate authority and seek redressal against it,” the Division Bench observed while disposing of a public interest litigation petition.
The PIL petition had been filed by R. Karuppusamy for constitution of Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) in all mills and factories which employ more than 10 people and also the district level Local Complaints Committee (LCC) for dealing with complaints from workplaces with less than 10 employees.
The Division Bench recorded the submission of State Government Pleader A. Edwin Prabhakar, assisted by Government Advocate T.K. Saravanan, that the LCCs had been constituted in all districts to deal with complaints from workplaces with less than 10 employees and where the complaint was against the employer himself.
However, when the petitioner’s counsel P. Selvi insisted that the implementation of the Act should also be monitored effectively, the judges disposed of the case after referring to the statutory obligation imposed upon the Centre as well as the State government under Section 23.
