Appellate authority under POSH Act can stay ICC reports: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court recently held that an appellate authority under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) can pass interim orders on appeals challenging the final report of the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) under the Act..In an order passed on November 5, Justice S Sunil Dutt Yadav noted that while the POSH Act does not have any specific provision empowering the appellate authority to consider such applications in appeal seeking an interim stay, the Act does not expressly bar the authority from doing so.“The provision under the Act and the Rules does not contain any stipulation regarding granting of interim relief. It must be noticed however 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,” the High Court said..The Court made the observations while allowing a petition filed by one Nagaraj GK, who had challenged the correctness of the final report of the internal committee that was probing allegations of sexual harassment at workplace levelled against him by one of his colleagues.The petitioner claimed before the High Court that the complaint against him was a false one. He further said that he had moved the appellate authority against ICC's final report that went against him.The petitioner told the High Court that while the appellate authority had issued notices based on his appeal, it had not considered his application for an interim stay on the ICC order on the ground that Section 18 of the POSH Act did not give it powers to consider applications seeking interim stay..The petitioner further argued that once an appeal is filed against an ICC report, unless the application for stay is considered by the authority, cases where genuine grievance were raised, would remain unaddressed until a final decision on the appeal.Since final disposal of such appeals would take time, appellants like him would be left without any relief in the interregnum, the petitioner argued..Justice Yadav held that while courts cannot exercise their inherent power in conflict with what has been specifically provided under a statute, when there is no such bar on grant of interim relief under a statute, “such power to grant interim relief could be considered.”“In light of the above, without entering into the correctness of the orders impugned, the writ petition is disposed of, observing that the appellate authority has the power to consider the application of the petitioner for stay, as may be appropriate upon the merits of the matter,” the Court said..It accordingly directed the appellate authority in the present case to consider the petitioner’s application seeking interim relief within two weeks..Advocate Nagaraja Hegde appeared for Nagaraj GK, the petitioner.Advocate Navya Shekar appeared for the labour commissioner appellate authority..[Read Order]