Supreme Court comes down on sexual harassment of women at workplace

Court order comes on a complaint by a bank officer

Updated - March 12, 2020 01:02 am IST

Published - March 11, 2020 11:20 pm IST - NEW DELHI

Claim about hostile work environment in a court.

Claim about hostile work environment in a court.

Sexual harassment of women at workplace is an affront to their fundamental right to equality and a life with dignity, the Supreme Court has held in a judgment

“Sexual harassment at the workplace is an affront to the fundamental rights of a woman to equality under Articles 14 and 15 and her right to live with dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution as well as her right to practice any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or business,” a Bench led by Justice D.Y. Chandrachud observed in a February 25 verdict.

The verdict, authored by Justice Chandrachud, was based on a complaint made by a senior officer of the Punjab and Sind Bank that she was transferred out from Indore to Jabalpur because she had complained about irregularities and corruption. The woman, a chief manager and Scale IV officer, said she was also sexually harassed by her senior officer.

Though the apex court held that employees cannot have a “choice of postings” unless if the transfer was proved to be mala fide or without authority, it found that her transfer was an act of reprisal against her complaints about the irregularities in the branch.

“She was transferred out and sent to a branch which was expected to be occupied by a Scale I officer. This is symptomatic of a carrot and stick policy adopted to suborn the dignity of a woman who is aggrieved by unfair treatment at her workplace. The law cannot countenance this. The order of transfer was an act of unfair treatment and is vitiated by malafide”, the court concluded.

Also read| In SC, Centre lists steps to end sexual harassment at workplace

Confirming the State High Court decision in March last year to quash her transfer, the apex court ordered her to be reposted in Indore and held her entitled to receive litigation costs of Rs. 50000 from the bank.

The court referred to the Sexual Harassment of of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, Redressal) Act of 2013, saying it's very purpose was to provide protection to working women.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in


Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.