Author
Abstract
The jurisprudence governing workplace sexual harassment in India has undergone significant constitutional transformation since the enactment of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013. Although the Act codified the principles laid down in Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, evolving employment relationships have required courts to reinterpret its foundational concepts in light of changing workplace realities. The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) represents one of India's most significant legislative initiatives towards securing gender equality, workplace dignity, and constitutional protection against sexual harassment. While the enactment of the Act codified the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, the transformation of employment relationships over the past decade has exposed interpretative challenges concerning two of its most fundamental expressions, namely "aggrieved woman" under Section 2(a) and "workplace" under Section 2(o). The expansion of hybrid work arrangements, digital workplaces, contractual employment, consultancy engagements, educational institutions, and cross-organisational interactions has required courts to reconcile statutory language with changing workplace realities. This paper undertakes a doctrinal analysis of the judicial evolution of these concepts through an examination of landmark decisions delivered by the Supreme Court of India and various High Courts between 2013 and 2026. Drawing upon constitutional principles, statutory interpretation, judicial precedents, government reports, and contemporary legal scholarship, the study argues that Indian courts have progressively adopted a purposive and constitutionally informed approach that has significantly broadened the protective scope of the POSH Act. It identifies three distinct phases in this evolution, namely statutory interpretation, purposive expansion, and constitutional consolidation, demonstrating how judicial reasoning has ensured that the legislation remains responsive to evolving patterns of employment and workplace governance. The paper contributes to existing scholarship by proposing a three-phase jurisprudential framework for understanding the constitutional evolution of POSH jurisprudence during its first decade. The paper further analyses emerging debates relating to virtual workplaces, inter-organisational jurisdiction, procedural fairness, and institutional accountability. It concludes that while judicial innovation has substantially strengthened the Act's implementation, sustained effectiveness requires legislative refinement, institutional capacity-building, and greater integration of constitutional values into workplace governance. The study contributes to the growing discourse on employment law by presenting a coherent analytical framework for understanding the first decade of POSH jurisprudence in India.
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bjf:ijltem:v:15:y:2026:i:8:a:295. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Dr. Pawan Verma (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.ijltemas.in/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.