PoSH

Is having a single Internal Committee (IC) for 3 offices with 20+ employees each in Bangalore compliant under the POSH Act?

3/13/2025

Under the POSH Act, 2013, having a single Internal Committee (IC) for three offices in Bangalore, each with 20+ employees, would not be compliant with the law. Here's why:

1. Definition of Workplace (Section 2(o)(ii) of the POSH Act):
The definition of a “workplace” under the POSH Act is quite broad and includes not just the main office but any branch, unit, or location where employees carry out the company’s business. This section defines a workplace as:

Any private sector organization engaged in commercial, professional, vocational, industrial, health, or financial activities, etc.
Each location or office of the company, especially if it's located in different places, is regarded as a separate workplace.

In this scenario, the company has three offices in Bangalore, each with more than 20 employees. Under this definition, each office is treated as a distinct workplace. The fact that they are all within the same city doesn't matter; what matters is that they are separate physical locations.

2. Obligation to Constitute an Internal Committee (Section 4(1)):
This section of the POSH Act states that every employer must form an Internal Committee (IC) for every workplace. The IC is responsible for handling complaints of sexual harassment and ensuring a safe work environment.
The proviso to Section 4(1) makes this obligation clearer:

If a company has multiple offices or administrative units at different locations or subdivisions, it must constitute a separate IC for each office.

This means that for a company with three offices in Bangalore, each with 20+ employees, a separate Internal Committee must be established for each office. This requirement exists to ensure that every workplace has a dedicated committee to address and manage sexual harassment complaints locally and efficiently.

3. Why a Single IC is Not Compliant:
A single Internal Committee overseeing all three offices would not comply with the law for the following reasons:

Each office is legally treated as a separate workplace. The POSH Act requires that each workplace must have its own Internal Committee.
Having just one IC for all three offices means that complaints from one office may not be dealt with locally, and employees may feel their concerns are not addressed promptly or appropriately.
The law aims to create accessibility for employees in every office location to raise complaints and ensures that the IC can act independently and without geographical limitations.

4. The Importance of Independent Internal Committees:

Proximity and Accessibility: Each office has its own working environment, dynamics, and culture, so it’s crucial that each location has an IC that is accessible to employees and can understand the local context.
Timely Resolution: Independent ICs in each office ensure that complaints are handled quickly and efficiently, preventing unnecessary delays caused by managing issues across multiple offices.
Comprehensive Oversight: Having separate ICs allows the committee members to focus specifically on their designated workplace, giving them a clearer understanding of the work environment and challenges faced by employees in that particular office.

5. Conclusion:
Given the above provisions of the POSH Act, each office must have its own Internal Committee, regardless of whether they are part of the same company or located within the same city. In this case, the company’s three offices in Bangalore should each have their own independent Internal Committee to comply with the POSH Act. A single IC for all three offices would be non-compliant, as it does not meet the requirement for having an IC for each distinct workplace.

Disclaimer: This document is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.