When organisations set up their Internal Committee (IC) under the PoSH Act, one of the most common areas of uncertainty lies in appointing the external member. This role is vital to the integrity and credibility of the committee, yet many employers misunderstand who qualifies or what makes a good fit. The law provides direction, but also flexibility, and it’s important to interpret this with care.
What the law says
Section 4 of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, clearly mandates that every Internal Committee must include one external member. This person must be either:
- From a non-governmental organisation (NGO) or association committed to the cause of women, or
- A person familiar with issues relating to women.
At first glance, this definition appears broad and somewhat vague. However, this intentional vagueness is by design. The law recognises that expertise in women’s issues can come from a variety of experiences and professions, not only from NGOs or legal circles. The Act thus allows for inclusivity, enabling employers to appoint individuals who may have worked in human resources, gender studies, psychology, social work, or community engagement, so long as they demonstrate a clear understanding of gender issues and empathy toward complainants.
For example, a psychologist specialising in workplace behaviour, a professor researching gender justice, or a social worker advocating for women’s rights could all qualify. What matters is awareness, sensitivity, and credibility, not just designation or title.
Avoiding legal liability
While the law gives employers flexibility, it does not compromise on qualifications. Several court cases have underscored that a poorly chosen external member can render the IC’s constitution invalid and its inquiries legally unsound.
In the landmark case of Jaya Kodate v. Rashtrasant Tukdoji Maharaj Nagpur University (2014), the court held that the absence of a properly qualified external member was a violation of Section 4 of the PoSH Act, thereby making the committee’s constitution illegal. The reasoning was clear: the external member’s role is central to ensuring impartiality, and the IC cannot function without this safeguard.
Similarly, in Ruchika Singh Chhabra v. Air France India (2018), the Delhi High Court observed that appointing a labour law lawyer as an external member did not align with the legislative intent of the Act. The person’s legal expertise alone did not necessarily make them “familiar with issues relating to women.” The court directed the employer to reconstitute the IC with a suitable external member, reinforcing the message that technical knowledge cannot substitute for gender awareness.
These judgments serve as a reminder that tokenism in appointments is a legal risk. The IC must be compliant both in letter and spirit, and every member, particularly the external one, must meet the qualifications outlined by the Act.
The importance of an external member
The external member is not a symbolic presence; they are the pillar of neutrality in the Internal Committee. Their independence ensures that the inquiry process remains unbiased and credible.
Being unaffiliated with the company, the external member offers an outsider’s perspective, uncoloured by office politics, interpersonal relationships, or hierarchy. This objectivity is crucial, especially in sensitive cases where the respondent may be a senior employee, or where internal members may inadvertently hold bias or fear repercussions.
For complainants and witnesses, the presence of an external member can make the process psychologically safer. They feel more comfortable sharing their experience with someone who is not part of their everyday workplace, who has no professional or personal stake in the outcome, and who can evaluate facts without prejudice.
Beyond inquiries, the external member often acts as an educator and advisor. They can help the IC interpret the law correctly, ensure documentation follows due process, and even guide the organisation on preventive measures such as awareness sessions and policy updates.
An ideal external member should therefore embody a mix of empathy, fairness, discretion, and domain knowledge. They should also have a grounding in how power dynamics and gender intersect in professional spaces, and a clear understanding of confidentiality requirements.
Choosing an external member
When appointing an external member, companies should follow a structured approach rather than relying on ad-hoc recommendations. The selection process can include:
- Reviewing background and experience: Look for individuals with demonstrable engagement in women’s issues, whether through NGOs, research, HR, law, or training.
- Assessing conflict of interest: Ensure the person has no business or personal ties with company leadership or employees that could influence impartiality.
- Verifying credibility: Seek references or examples of prior PoSH-related work, publications, or training sessions.
- Formalising the appointment: Issue an official letter detailing the member’s tenure (typically three years), responsibilities, and honorarium, if applicable.
Once appointed, organisations must also invest in their external member’s effectiveness. This includes sharing company policies, reporting procedures, and previous case precedents (while maintaining confidentiality). Doing so enables them to operate in alignment with internal protocols while maintaining independence.
It’s also worth noting that the PoSH Act permits reappointment. If an external member demonstrates reliability, fairness, and a sound understanding of the company’s culture, they can be retained for multiple terms. Conversely, if they do not meet expectations, employers may choose to replace them at the end of their term.
We have a panel of external members who are trained in law and are experts in the PoSH law. Reach out to us at hello@serein.inc