The POSH Act at 12 — Five Things Indian Employers Still Get Wrong

BySirish Tamvada

Editorial note: Originally drafted in April 2026 and published as part of The Tamvada Brief archive.

The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 — POSH — became operational on 9 December 2013. Twelve years on, most Indian employers can recite that they have an Internal Committee. Fewer can show that the Committee is properly constituted, that the policy is actually distributed, that the annual training has happened, that the annual report has been filed. The Supreme Court’s recent directions in Aureliano Fernandes v State of Goa (2023) sharpened expectations across the board; mistakes that were once tolerated as inexperience are now treated as institutional failure.

Here are the five most common compliance gaps the firm encounters in 2026 — and how to close each one in a week.

Gap 1 — Internal Committee constituted, but not properly

Under Section 4 of the POSH Act, every employer with 10 or more workers must constitute an Internal Committee (IC) (the Act used the term “Internal Complaints Committee” originally; the 2016 amendment to the Rules adopted “IC”). The constitution is specific:

  • Presiding Officer — a woman employed at a senior level in the workplace
  • Two members from amongst employees, preferably committed to women’s cause or with legal knowledge
  • One external member — from an NGO or association working on women’s issues, OR a person familiar with the subject

At least half the members must be women. Term: three years. The committee must be re-constituted at the end of the term.

Where the firm sees gaps:

  • The Presiding Officer is junior — not “senior level” in the spirit of Section 4(2)(a)
  • The external member has lapsed and not been replaced
  • Half-women requirement breached
  • Committee continues beyond three-year term without re-constitution

Fix in a week. Audit your IC composition against Section 4. Re-issue a constitution document (TPL-13) that names the four/five members, their term, and is signed by the employer. File the document with HR.

Gap 2 — Policy exists, distribution doesn’t

Section 19 of the Act lists employer’s duties — including duty to “provide a safe working environment” and “display at any conspicuous place in the workplace the penal consequences of sexual harassments and the order constituting the Internal Committee”. Section 22 makes filing the annual report to the District Officer mandatory.

Most employers have a policy. Many have it on the intranet. Few can show that:

  • Every employee, including new joiners, received the policy
  • Display is current (with the current IC names)
  • The policy is in the languages relevant to the workforce
  • Training was provided as required by Section 19(c)

Fix in a week. Mass distribution to all current employees with read-receipt logging. Update wall displays. Schedule a workshop within 30 days. Document everything.

Gap 3 — Annual training treated as a formality

Section 19(c) requires the employer to “organise workshops and awareness programmes at regular intervals for sensitising the employees with the provisions of the Act”. In practice, most employers run a 30-minute slide deck once a year and call it done.

The Supreme Court in Aureliano Fernandes v State of Goa (2023) directed government departments and educational institutions to ensure annual training and certification. The expectation is now spread across all employers — POSH training that is not interactive, not assessed, and not certified does not meet the spirit of Section 19(c).

Fix in a quarter. Move to interactive workshops (in-person or live-virtual), with scenario-based discussion, an assessment, and a participation record. The training provider must give a certificate; the certificates must be filed.

Gap 4 — Annual report not filed

Section 21 requires the IC to submit an annual report to the employer and the District Officer “at the end of the calendar year, in such form and at such time as may be prescribed”. Section 22 mandates the employer to include the number of cases filed and their disposal in its director’s report (where applicable under the Companies Act).

Across the firm’s caseload, the annual report to the District Officer is the single most-missed compliance. Most employers conclude the calendar year without filing.

Fix in a week. For FY 2025–26, prepare the annual report now (covering 1 January 2025 to 31 December 2025, in line with the Act’s calendar-year framing). Use the prescribed format. File with the District Officer of the relevant district. Retain the acknowledged receipt.

Gap 5 — Confidentiality is mishandled

Section 16 of the POSH Act prohibits the publication or making known of “the contents of the complaint made… the identity and addresses of the aggrieved woman, respondent and witnesses, any information relating to conciliation and inquiry proceedings, recommendations of the Internal Committee and the action taken by the employer”. Contravention attracts a fine that may extend to Rs 5,000 (Section 17) — modest, but the reputational consequence and the civil liability are large.

In practice, the firm sees:

  • Complaint and inquiry details circulated to HR teams and senior management without justification
  • Internal communications discussing matters in identifying terms
  • “Background checks” of subsequent allegations by referring to prior complaint records

Fix in a quarter. Move all POSH matter files to a controlled-access location. Train HR and senior management on confidentiality boundaries. Adopt code-named referencing in any internal correspondence beyond the IC.

A scenario — the senior employee accused

A 200-person tech company in Bangalore receives a complaint against a VP-level employee. The IC is properly constituted; the policy is distributed. The complaint proceeds. Two weeks in, an HR manager mentions the matter — by name — in a town hall presentation about “the importance of POSH”.

Section 16 has been breached. The complainant resigns alleging hostile environment. The respondent, separately, files a complaint about the public disclosure. The District Officer hears about the matter through a news report.

What started as a contained inquiry becomes three matters at once: the original complaint, the Section 16 breach, and the employer’s reputation issue. Each is independently expensive.

The fix was a 10-line confidentiality protocol, drafted six months earlier, that the HR manager would have read on her first day.

What every employer must do this quarter

  1. Re-constitute the IC properly. Senior Presiding Officer, four/five members, half women, external member in date, three-year term documented. (One-week fix.)
  2. Refresh distribution and display. Policy distributed to all employees with read-receipt; wall displays updated with current IC names. (One-week fix.)
  3. Schedule and document training. Interactive, assessed, certificated. (Quarter fix.)
  4. File the annual report. With the District Officer, in prescribed format. (One-week fix once the data is collected.)
  5. Adopt a confidentiality protocol. 10 lines, IC and HR trained on it. (Quarter fix.)
  6. For listed and unlisted public companies — board-level oversight. Section 22 disclosure in the director’s report; an IC update at one board meeting per year.

Counter-position to flag

There has been ongoing debate about extending POSH to all genders. The current Act applies to “aggrieved woman” only (Section 2(a)). Several states and the Equal Opportunities Commission have considered broadening the framework; the central Act has not been amended on this point. Many employers have voluntarily extended internal policies to be gender-neutral while complying with the Act’s specific framework for women.

A separate debate concerns whether the IC’s findings are binding or recommendatory and on what standard. Section 11 frames the inquiry; Section 13 deals with recommendations. The IC’s report is typically recommendatory to the employer, who must then act under Section 13(3) — but the report is also the basis for further proceedings, including civil and criminal, and is therefore highly consequential.

The bottom line

Twelve years in, POSH compliance is not legally complex — it is operationally consistent. The same five mistakes repeat across organisations because no one owns POSH end-to-end. The fix is institutional ownership: name a person, give them a calendar, and audit annually. Most matters that escalate to District Officer or Court do so because an avoidable procedural mistake compounded a substantive issue.

Sources & further reading

Primary statute (source: indiacode.nic.in):
– Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 — Act No. 14 of 2013
– Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Rules, 2013

Regulator portal:
– Ministry of Women and Child Development — wcd.nic.in
– She-Box online complaint portal — shebox.wcd.gov.in

Key Supreme Court decisions:
– Vishaka v State of Rajasthan, (1997) 6 SCC 241 — the foundational guidelines
– Aureliano Fernandes v State of Goa, (2023) — recent directions on implementation

Paired toolkit CTA: Employment and workplace compliance — POSH, the new Labour Codes, employment contracts, employee handbook — all sit together. Our Startup Legal Toolkit Pro gives you the foundational employment templates; a POSH-specific module is in development.

Book a free consultation on TopMate for a POSH audit of your organisation.

This blog is informational and educational. It is not legal advice.

Originally published 22 April 2026 · Last updated 12 May 2026.

Similar Posts