Contracting Out Of The Posh Act? The Enforceability Of Immediate Termination Clauses For Sexual Harassment Allegations
- IJLLR Journal
- Jul 5
- 2 min read
Probeen Khamrui, BA LLB, Rizvi Law College, Mumbai
When an employee is accused of sexual harassment, can an employer legally circumvent the Internal Committee and fire them right away? Although the POSH Act of 2013 provides a thorough legal framework for looking into workplace sexual harassment, there is still much to learn about the enforcement of contractual provisions that provide rapid termination. In light of the Act's required framework and the Supreme Court's rulings in Dr. Vijayakumaran C.P.V. v. Central University of Kerala and Aureliano Fernandes v. State of Goa, this essay investigates whether such clauses can endure. It contends that conflicting contractual clauses are legally unsustainable because the POSH Act transfers adjudicatory authority from employers to the Internal Committee.
Can an employer create a clause in an employment contract that gives them the right to fire a worker right away if they are accused of sexual harassment without first forwarding the complaint to the Internal Committee established by the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013? The question of whether private contractual autonomy can prevail when Parliament has established an exclusive legal mechanism for resolving a specific class of disputes is a deeper constitutional and statutory principle, even though it seems to be a question of contractual interpretation. Employment contracts typically give employers a great deal of disciplinary power. They have the authority to establish grounds for dismissal, control behaviour at work, and decide the repercussions of employee wrongdoing. Contractual freedom, however, has never been unrestricted. It functions within the bounds set by statute law, especially where laws establish obligatory responsibilities in the public interest. One such legislative intervention is the POSH Act. Instead of just outlawing sexual harassment in the workplace, it creates a specific institutional framework intended to guarantee that claims are looked at impartially, independently, and in compliance with standard procedural protections. Therefore, rather than the fundamental principles regulating employer-employee interactions, the validity of contractual clauses authorizing prompt termination must be evaluated against the legislative responsibilities imposed by the Act.
