NEW DELHI, August 13: The Supreme Court, in the exercise of its extraordinary powers under Article 32 for enforcement of fundamental rights, today prohibited sexual harassment of women at work places while laying down exhaustive guidelines and norms which would fill the vacuum in existing legislation.

The directions which would be ``binding and enforceable in law'' until suitable legislation is enacted in the field, include duty of the employer or other responsible persons in work places and other institutions; definition of sexual harassment and preventive steps.

The judgment by a three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice J S Verma, Justices Sujata V Manohar and B N Kirpal came on a petition brought as a class action by a group of social activists and NGOs for the enforcement of the fundamental rights of working women following an incident of alleged brutal gang rape of a social worker in Rajasthan and ``finding suitable methods for realisation of the true concept of `gender equality'.''

The judgment has defined sexual harassment to include ``unwelcome sexually determined behaviour'' such as physical contact and advances, a demand or request for sexual favours, sexually coloured remarks, showing pornography and any other unwelcome physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct of sexual nature. It has also been stated that when a woman has reasonable grounds to believe that her objection would ``disadvantage'' her in connection with her employment, it would be considered as ``discriminatory.'' Referring to the definition of human rights as in Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, the judgment states that it would be the duty of the employer to prevent sexual harassment in work places as well as to provide the procedures for the resolution, settlement or prosecution of such acts.

Among the preventive steps outlined by the Court are: express prohibition of sexual harassment should be notified, published and circulated in appropriate ways; rules and regulations relating to conduct should include rules prohibiting such harassment and provide for penalties; for private employers, steps should be taken to include the above prohibitions in the standing orders under the Industrial Employment Act, 1946; appropriate work conditions should be provided.

The Court has also called for initiation of criminal proceedings ``where such conduct amounts to a specific offence'' as well as the option to the victim to seek transfer of the perpetrator or their own transfer. Disciplinary action has also been recommended where such conduct amounts to ``misconduct in employment'' as defined by the service rules. Yet another guideline laid down by the Court is constitution of a complaint mechanism in an organisation for redress of the complaint and the mechanism should ensure time bound treatment of complaints. Apart from such a mechanism, a complaints committee or a special counsellor or other support service is also required to be set up.

Copyright © 1997 Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd.