A recurring vulnerability in employment law is the weaponization of hyper-technical procedural rules to shield severe workplace misconduct. In high-stakes disciplinary actions, respondents frequently scour dense, legacy civil service rules or ancient standing orders to find minor administrative omissions, using them to stall, invalidate, or completely quash severe penalties. In Arun A. Iyer v. IIT Bombay, the Bombay High Court forcefully addressed this issue, reminding corporate and institutional employers that "procedure is the handmaiden of justice," designed to facilitate equity rather than act as a technical loophole for evasion. The Court observed that a highly formalistic, myopic approach cannot be adopted when interpreting enforcement mechanisms under specialized, welfare-driven legislations like the POSH Act . When an autonomous institution or a corporate entity possesses a robust internal framework that explicitly outlines how sexual harassment complaints are investi...
In the decade since the implementation of the Prevention of Sexual Harassment ( POSH ) Act of 2013, India has made significant strides in addressing workplace harassment. However, while large corporations have largely adapted to the new regulatory environment, Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) continue to grapple with the complexities of implementing POSH guidelines effectively. The POSH Predicament for SMEs SMEs, which form the backbone of India's economy, often find themselves in a precarious position when it comes to POSH compliance. The challenges they face are multifaceted: 1. Limited Resources: Unlike their larger counterparts, SMEs often operate on tight budgets, making it difficult to allocate funds for POSH-related initiatives. 2. Lack of Awareness: Many SME owners and employees are not fully aware of the POSH Act's requirements and their rights and responsibilities under it. 3. Informal Work Culture: The often close-knit, informal nature of SMEs can make it ...