CS Executive · Setting Up of Business, Industrial and Labour Laws · Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013
After an inquiry at Kiran Logistics Ltd., the Internal Committee finds that Anita's allegation against her manager could not be proved for lack of adequate evidence. There is no finding that she acted maliciously. What is the correct position under the Act?
A failure to prove the complaint does not by itself justify action against the complainant. Action can be recommended only if malicious intent, falsity or forged documents is established after an inquiry in the prescribed procedure, so Anita should not be penalised merely for inadequate proof.
- AAction must be recommended against Anita because the complaint failed
- BMere inability to substantiate the complaint or provide adequate proof need not attract action against the complainant; malicious intent must be established after an inquiry before any action is recommendedCorrect
- CAction may be recommended against Anita without any inquiry, as the Committee's finding is enough
- DAction may be recommended against her witnesses automatically
Explanation
Section 14(1) and its provisos say that inability to substantiate a complaint need not attract action, and that malicious intent must be established after an inquiry in the prescribed procedure before action is recommended. Option A treats failure as malice, which the proviso rejects. Witnesses face action only if they gave false evidence or produced forged or misleading documents.
Did you get it right without looking?
One question tells you little. A timed set on Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.
More Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 questions
- Meridian Textiles Pvt Ltd, Surat, has constituted an Internal Committee at its head office. The HR head asks what the Act requires the emplo…
- During an inquiry by the Internal Committee of Orbit Retail Ltd, which of the following is a power the Committee has, as a civil court under…
- Priya, an employee, has died after an alleged incident of harassment, and no complaint was filed. Under section 9 of the POSH Act, 2013, who…
- Anita was harassed on 5 January, 20 February and 10 March in a series of incidents. She files a written complaint on 20 June (more than thre…
- Kaveri Logistics has 8 workers and no Internal Committee. A woman employee wishes to complain of sexual harassment by a supervisor. To whom …
- An Internal Committee inquires into a complaint by Pooja against Rahul, both employees of Deccan Pharma Ltd. The inquiry ends and the Commit…