Bombay High Court on Maintainability of Writ Petition Against Internal Complaints Committee under POSH Act.

Headnote:

The Bombay High Court held that a writ petition challenging the findings of an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) is not maintainable when an appellate remedy under Section 18 of the Act is available. The Court observed that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be invoked against private entities like Akasa Air unless they perform public duties.

Background:

• The petitioner, a pilot with Akasa Air, was accused of inappropriate conduct towards a trainee captain during a training session.

• Following an inquiry, the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) found the petitioner guilty of sexual harassment under the POSH Act.

• The petitioner approached the High Court under Article 226, alleging gross procedural violations—denial of cross-examination, absence of a personal hearing, and violation of principles of natural justice.

• The respondents contended that Akasa Air is a private company, and the POSH Act provides a statutory appeal under Section 18, making the writ petition non-maintainable.

Court’s Observations:

• The Court reiterated that Article 226 of the Constitution enables writs to be issued against bodies performing public duties or functions of a public nature, not private entities.

• Though the Internal Complaints Committee acts under a statutory framework, it functions internally within a private employer and does not discharge a public function.

• The Court clarified that alleged procedural irregularities or breach of natural justice in ICC proceedings are redressable under the statutory appellate mechanism provided by Section 18 of the POSH Act.

• Only in exceptional cases involving gross illegality or jurisdictional error can the writ court intervene, which was not made out in the present case.

• As an efficacious alternative remedy was available, the writ petition was held not maintainable.

Outcome:

• The writ petition was dismissed, with liberty to the petitioner to avail the appellate remedy under Section 18 of the POSH Act.

Legal Provisions Discussed:

• Section 18, Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 – Appeal.

• Article 226, Constitution of India – Writ jurisdiction of High Courts.

• Principles of Natural Justice – Right to cross-examination and personal hearing.

Citation: 2025:BHC-AS:46642

Case: ABC & Ors. v. Internal Complaints Committee, Akasa Air & Ors.

Court: High Court of Bombay

Coram: Justice N.J. Jamadar

Date of Decision: 3 November 2025

Writ Petition (St.) No.: 15574 of 2025