Latest news with #BCMG
India Today
08-07-2025
- Politics
- India Today
Lawyers not employees: Court says POSH Act not applicable for Bar Council staff
The Bombay High Court on Monday clarified that the Bar Council of India (BCI) and the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa (BCMG) are not obligated to form Internal Complaints Committees (ICCs) as per the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act 2013 (POSH Act) as they do not have an employer-employee relationship with practising bench, comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sandeep Marne, explained that the POSH Act is applicable only in contexts where there is a clear employer-employee relationship. They concluded that because bar councils do not employ the advocates who practice under them, the Act does not apply to complaints lodged against fellow response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by the "UNS Women Legal Association," the bench emphasised that the Advocates Act still provides remedies for professional misconduct, including harassment. "Section 35 of the Advocates Act provides action against any kind of professional or other misconduct by lawyers. This is a remedy available for lady lawyers to file complaints against any kind of harassment which may amount to professional or other misconduct," the bench PIL sought the creation of permanent grievance redressal mechanisms specifically for sexual harassment complaints against lawyers. However, the court's ruling indicates that existing legal frameworks under the Advocates Act should suffice for addressing such Senior Advocate Milind Sathe and Advocate Shekhar Jagtap, representing BCMG and BCI respectively, pointed out that both councils already have ICCs for their own employees. They reiterated the absence of an employer-employee relationship with practising advocates as a reason for the inapplicability of the POSH court's decision highlights the delineation between regulatory bodies like Bar Councils and actual employment contexts. While Bar Councils regulate the profession, they do not engage lawyers in an employment capacity, thus exempting them from certain legal obligations under workplace harassment laws.- EndsTune InMust Watch
Hindustan Times
08-07-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Lawyers are not employees of Bar Council: HC refuses to direct for ICC under PoSH
MUMBAI: The Bombay high court on Monday refused to issue directions to the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa (BCMG) to constitute an internal complaints committee (ICC) to deal with complaints of sexual harassment under the Prevention of Sexual Harassment (PoSH) at Workplace Act, 2013 as lawyers are not employers of the bar council. Mumbai, India - September 03, 2021: Bombay High Court at Fort, in Mumbai, India, on Friday, September 03, 2021. (Photo by Anshuman Poyrekar/Hindustan Times) (Anshuman Poyrekar/HT PHOTO) A division bench of justice Ajey Gadkari and justice Rajesh Patil was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the Women Legal Association seeking a permanent grievance redressal mechanism to address complaints of sexual harassment against lawyers. The PoSH Act protects women from sexual harassment in the workplace and provides a mechanism for complaint redressal. It mandates the formation of ICCs in organizations with 10 or more employees to handle such complaints. Under the Act, the employer is responsible for creating a safe working environment, formulating a policy against sexual harassment and establishing an ICC. However, the court held that the provisions of the PoSH Act would not apply to the complaints of female lawyers of the Bar Council of India (BCI) and the BCMG as there was no 'employee-employer' relationship between the lawyers and the bar councils. 'The provisions of the Act of 2013 apply when there is an employee-employer relationship. But in the case of advocates and the BCI or the BCMG, there is no such relationship as neither the BCI nor the BCMG can be said to be employers of the advocates and, thus the provisions of the Act of 2013 will not apply to complaints filed by lady lawyers,' the court said while rejecting the relief. 'It is, however, made clear that the provisions will apply on complaints filed by any of the employees or the committee members of the BCI and BCMG,' the court observed. It added that Section 35 of the Advocates Act provides action against professional or other misconduct by the lawyers. 'This is a remedy available for lady lawyers, to file complaints against any kind of harassment which may amount to professional or other misconduct,' the bench added.
Time of India
07-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
HC: Bar councils don't employ advocates, so no POSH panel
Mumbai: The Bombay HC Monday said the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, will not apply to complaints by advocates to bar councils as there is no employer-employee relationship between them, reports Rosy Sequeira. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Hearing a petition seeking direction to bar councils to constitute committees to address sexual harassment complaints against advocates, a bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sandeep Marne said the POSH Act will apply to cases where there is a relationship of employer and employee, and the bar councils cannot be said to be "employer of advocates". However, the Act will be applicable to employees of the bar councils. Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sandeep Marne were hearing a petition by UNS Women Association seeking direction to the Bar Council of India (BCI) and Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa (BCMG) to constitute a permanent grievance redressal committee of women advocates in all state bar council offices and bar associations to address sexual harassment complaints against advocates as per the Supreme Court's Oct 2012 directions in Medha Kotwal Lele's case. The petition also sought implementation of the POSH Act and a committee of lawyers, NGOs, and retired women judges to review and look into lacunas in the Act. Senior advocate Milind Sathe, for BCMG, and advocate Shekhar Jagtap, for BCI, submitted that there is no employer-employee relationship between advocates and bar councils. Hence, the establishment of an internal complaints committee (ICC) is not applicable as per POSH Act. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now They said there is a provision for local committees headed by the district collector to receive complaints of sexual harassment for a workplace having fewer than 10 employees. However, neither ICC nor the local committees can be invoked by women advocates. Sathe said under Section 35 of the Advocates Act, 1961, there is remedy for professional and other misconduct. The judges referred to sections of the POSH Act relating to the constitution of ICC and local committees and also considered the definition of employer. In the order, they said it is evident that these provisions will apply to a case where there is a relationship of employer and employee. Therefore, neither BCI nor BCMG "can be said to be employer of advocates" and "therefore the 2013 Act will not apply to advocates," they added. However, the POSH Act will be applicable to employees of BCI and BCMG. Sathe and Jagtap said BCMG and BCI have constituted ICCs to address grievances of their employees. Additional govt pleader Jyoti Chavan said local committees have also been established. The judges noted that as far as the grievance of women advocates is concerned, there is a forum available under Section 35 of the Advocates Act. Disposing of the PIL, they said no further order is required to be passed.
Time of India
07-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Bar council not an employer, no need for POSH panel: HC
Representative image MUMBAI: Bombay high court said on Monday that the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 will not apply to complaints by advocates to bar councils as there is no employer-employee relationship between them. Hearing a petition seeking direction to bar councils to set up committees to address sexual harassment complaints against advocates, a bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sandeep Marne said POSH Act will apply to cases where there is an employer-employee relationship, and bar councils cannot be said to be "employer of advocates". The petition also sought the implementation of the POSH Act and a committee of lawyers, NGOs, and retired women judges to review and look into lacunas in the Act. The bench were hearing a petition by UNS Women Association seeking direction to the Bar Council of India and Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa to constitute a permanent grievance redressal committee of female advocates in all state bar council offices and bar associations to address sexual harassment complaints against advocates as per Supreme Court's Oct 2012 directions in Medha Kotwal Lele's case. The petition also sought the implementation of POSH Act and a committee of lawyers, NGOs, and retired female judges to review and look into lacunas in the Act. Senior advocate Milind Sathe, for BCMG, and advocate Shekhar Jagtap, for BCI, submitted that there is no employer-employee relationship between advocates and bar councils. Hence, the establishment of an internal complaints committee is not applicable as per POSH Act. They said there is a provision for local committees headed by the district collector to receive complaints of sexual harassment for a workplace having fewer than 10 employees. However, neither ICC nor the local committees can be invoked by female advocates. Sathe said under Section 35 of the Advocates Act, 1961, there is remedy for professional and other misconduct. The judges referred to sections of the POSH Act relating to the constitution of ICC and local committees and also considered the definition of employer. In the order, they said it is evident that these provisions will apply to a case where there is a relationship of employer and employee. Therefore, neither BCI nor BCMG 'can be said to be employer of advocates' and 'therefore the 2013 Act will not apply to advocates', they added. However, POSH Act will be applicable to employees of BCI and BCMG. Sathe and Jagtap said BCMG and BCI have constituted ICCs to address grievances of their employees. Additional government pleader Jyoti Chavan said local committees have also been established. The judges noted that as far as the grievance of female advocates is concerned, there is a forum available under Section 35 of the Advocates Act, which provides for lodging complaints tantamount to professional and other misconduct.
Indian Express
07-07-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Advocates not employees of Bar Councils; complaints committee under PoSH Act not applicable: Bombay HC
The Bombay High Court on Monday observed that neither the Bar Council of India (BCI) nor Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa (BCMG) are employers of advocates. The court said that Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (PoSH Act) applies when employer-employee relationship exists. Therefore, provisions related to formation of Internal Complaints Committees (ICCs) are not applicable to advocates. 'However, the same would apply in so far as it pertains to employees of the BCI as well as BCMG,' the HC noted. It added that the women advocates can raise their grievances, including complaints of sexual harassment under Section 35 of the Advocates Act, 1961 which prescribes punishment for professional as well as other misconduct by lawyers. A bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sandeep V Marne disposed of PIL filed in 2017 by the UNS Women Legal Association, which sought formation of permanent grievance redressal mechanism to redress sexual harassment complaints against advocates. Senior advocate Milind Sathe representing BCMG stated that local committees have been formed under Section 6 of the PoSH Act across all districts led by District Magistrates or Collectors. Sathe also submitted that Section 35 of the 1961 law provides any person including woman advocate to lodge complaint before the state bar council for misconduct, including acts of sexual harassment. Advocate Shekhar Jagtap for BCI also submitted that it has formed panels under the law. 'It is evident that the provisions of the Act apply to a case of an employer which presupposes that there has to be an employer and employee relationship. Neither BCI nor BCMG is an employer of advocates. Therefore, the provisions of the 2013 Act do not apply in so far as it pertains to advocates,' the HC noted. 'However, the same would apply insofar as it pertains to employees of the BCI and BCMG. In view of aforesaid, no further orders are required to be passed in the PIL and the same is disposed of,' the court held.
