On December 9, 2024, the Supreme Court of India disposed of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that sought the extension of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) to political parties. The Court directed the petitioner, Supreme Court lawyer Yogamaya M.G., to first approach the Election Commission of India (ECI), as it is the competent authority regarding political parties’ functioning.
Background of the PIL
The PIL sought to bring political parties under the ambit of the POSH Act by urging them to establish Internal Complaints Committees (ICCs) as required under Section 4 of the Act. The petitioner contended that individuals working within political parties should be considered “employees” under the POSH Act and that the ECI should mandate compliance with the Act as a condition for political parties’ registration and recognition under the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
The petitioner also demanded time-bound compliance from political parties, including regular reporting and public disclosure of the functioning of ICCs.
Court’s Observations and Decision
The bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice Manmohan examined the case and pointed out that the Kerala High Court had previously held that political parties are not bound by the POSH Act, a decision which has not been challenged. The bench also questioned the legal status of political parties, noting that they are registered entities under Section 29A of the Representation of Peoples Act, recognized by the ECI.
During the proceedings, Justice Kant suggested that the petitioner approach the Election Commission, which has jurisdiction over political parties. The petitioner agreed, and the Court disposed of the petition with the liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent authority, directing that if the grievance is not addressed effectively, the petitioner may approach the judicial forum again.
Reliefs Sought by the Petitioner
The PIL had requested the following reliefs:
- Constitution of ICCs by Political Parties: The petitioner sought a directive to all political parties to establish ICCs as per Section 4 of the POSH Act, 2013.
- Extension of Employee Definition: The petitioner requested that individuals engaged in political party activities be declared as “employees” under Section 2(f) of the POSH Act.
- ECI’s Role in Compliance: A directive was sought to the Election Commission to mandate compliance with the POSH Act as a prerequisite for political parties’ registration and recognition.
- Guidelines for Time-bound Compliance: The petitioner asked for guidelines ensuring political parties’ compliance, including reporting and public disclosure of the functioning of ICCs.
Court’s Order
The Supreme Court disposed of the PIL and advised the petitioner to first approach the ECI to address the issue, offering the petitioner the option to return to the judicial forum if necessary. The Court emphasized that the ECI is the competent authority for dealing with issues related to political parties.
Case Title: Yogamaya MG Vs Union of India | Diary No. 48246/2024
This decision highlights the Court’s stance on the importance of the ECI’s role in regulating political parties and the procedural steps necessary before judicial intervention in such matters.
Key Details:
Date of Order: December 9, 2024
Bench: Justice Surya Kant and Justice Manmohan
Lawcutor 