Quick answer: The POSH Act has no section that lets a complaint be withdrawn, but section 10 allows a settlement through conciliation. It needs the woman’s request, comes before the inquiry, and never rests on money. After a settlement the committee holds no further inquiry (s.10(4)), yet the Gauhati High Court has held, for an employer under Service Rules, that its own disciplinary powers survive.
By Manas Editorial Team
HR teams often hear “she wants to withdraw” and “can we just settle this?” The Act answers the second clearly and is silent on the first.
Can a POSH complaint be withdrawn?
On our reading of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (Act No. 14 of 2013), no section gives the aggrieved woman a right to withdraw a complaint once it is made. Section 9(1) deals with making it: in writing, to the Internal Committee, within 3 months of the incident or the last incident in a series, extendable by up to 3 months for reasons recorded in writing.
What the Act does give her is a choice about how the matter ends. She can ask for conciliation under section 10, or she can let the inquiry run. A complaint that is not proved is also not a false one: section 14 lets the committee recommend action against a complainant only where the complaint is malicious or knowingly false, and the inability to prove it is not by itself enough.
What does section 10 say about settling a complaint?
Section 10(1) says the Internal Committee or, as the case may be, the Local Committee “may, before initiating an inquiry under section 11 and at the request of the aggrieved woman take steps to settle the matter between her and the respondent through conciliation”. Three conditions follow:
- Her request: conciliation does not start because the employer, the respondent or the committee prefers it.
- Before the inquiry: the text says “before initiating an inquiry under section 11”. The Act gives no number of days for conciliation itself.
- No money as the basis: the proviso states that “no monetary settlement shall be made as a basis of conciliation”.
Section 10(2) tells the committee to record the settlement and forward it to the employer or the District Officer “to take action as specified in the recommendation”. Section 10(3) requires copies for both parties.
Why can money never be the basis of a settlement?
The proviso to section 10(1) closes that door in terms. A payment from the respondent to the woman cannot be the thing the settlement rests on. Money enters the Act at a different point: if the committee finds the allegation proved after an inquiry, section 13(3) lets it recommend that a sum be deducted from the respondent’s pay and paid to her as compensation (a court can also order compensation on conviction under section 11(2)), and section 15 sets out how compensation is decided. That is a finding after a hearing, not a deal before one.
So an employer should never offer, or let a manager offer, a payment for dropping the complaint. That is not the conciliation section 10 describes.
What happens after a settlement is reached?
- No further inquiry by the committee: section 10(4) says that where a settlement is arrived at, “no further inquiry shall be conducted” by the Internal Committee or the Local Committee.
- Breach revives the matter: under the proviso to section 11(1), if the woman informs the committee that a term of the settlement has not been complied with by the respondent, the committee “shall proceed to make an inquiry into the complaint” or, as the case may be, forward it to the police.
Does conciliation stop the employer from taking its own action?
Not on the reasoning of the Gauhati High Court. In W.A. No. 149 of 2025 (Division Bench of the Chief Justice and Justice Arun Dev Choudhury, judgment of 9 December 2025), a woman officer complained to the Internal Committee. Both sides opted for conciliation, and the settlement was that they would not work in proximity. The committee curtailed its inquiry and declined to reopen it after conciliation. The employer then began separate departmental proceedings, and a single judge quashed them, reading section 10(4) as a bar.
The Division Bench set that part aside. It held that “what is barred is any further inquiry after the conciliation by the Internal Committee or the Local Committee” (para 10), and that the bar does not extend to the employer’s independent disciplinary jurisdiction under its Service Rules. It called the Act “a minimum protective statute” that does not curtail disciplinary jurisdiction unless it expressly says so (para 14), and directed the departmental proceedings to resume from where they had stopped (para 15).
Two cautions. First, the employer there was the Airports Authority of India, acting under its Service Rules, and the ruling does not decide how a private company’s own disciplinary process interacts with a settlement. Second, it is a Gauhati High Court decision; it does not bind courts in other States and is persuasive only elsewhere.
Must the committee offer conciliation at all?
The text says “may”. A single judge of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, in a ruling reported as 2024 SCC OnLine MP 7314 (November 2024), read it more strictly: the committee “is under obligation to make an attempt to settle the matter by way of conciliation” (as reported), and only if that fails should it inquire under the service rules. Given the words “at the request of the aggrieved woman” in the Act, a careful committee does not press her. It tells her in writing that conciliation is available, records her answer, and goes on to the inquiry if she declines.
Which time limits apply to a complaint?
| Step | Section | Time limit or rule |
|---|---|---|
| Written complaint | s.9(1) | Within 3 months of the incident or last incident; extendable by up to 3 months for recorded reasons |
| Conciliation | s.10(1) | Only at the woman’s request and before the inquiry begins; no money as its basis |
| Inquiry | s.11(3), s.11(4) | Civil-court powers; complete within 90 days |
| Report of findings | s.13(1) | Within 10 days of completing the inquiry |
| Employer acts on recommendations | s.13(4) | Within 60 days of receipt |
| Appeal | s.18(2) | Within 90 days of the recommendations |
| Penalty for an employer who contravenes the Act | s.26(1), s.26(2) | Fine up to ₹50,000; on a repeat conviction, twice the punishment and cancellation, withdrawal or non-renewal of a licence or registration |
What should an Internal Committee do in practice?
Good practice, not extra legal requirements:
- Write the conciliation option into your POSH policy: at her request, before the inquiry, no monetary settlement.
- Give the complainant a written note of the option and the inquiry route, and keep her dated choice on file.
- Keep the record exact; section 10(2) and 10(3) already require it to go to the employer and copies to both parties.
- Take legal advice before starting disciplinary proceedings after a settlement; the Gauhati ruling concerned Service Rules.
Frequently asked questions
On our reading, the Act has no section that allows a complaint to be withdrawn. What it allows is conciliation under section 10, at her request and before the inquiry starts. If she does not want conciliation, the committee continues with the inquiry.
No. The proviso to section 10(1) says that “no monetary settlement shall be made as a basis of conciliation”. Compensation under the Act comes after a finding, not as the basis of a settlement: if an inquiry finds the allegation proved, the committee may recommend a deduction from the respondent’s pay under section 13(3).
Only the aggrieved woman. Section 10(1) allows conciliation “at the request of the aggrieved woman”. It must also come before the inquiry is initiated under section 11.
She can tell the committee. Under the proviso to section 11(1), the committee must then proceed to make an inquiry into the complaint or, as the case may be, forward the complaint to the police.
The Gauhati High Court held on 9 December 2025 that section 10(4) bars only a further inquiry by the committee, not the employer’s disciplinary jurisdiction under its Service Rules. It is one High Court’s view on a body governed by such rules.
Yes. Section 16 bars making public or known to the press or media the contents of the complaint, the identity of the parties and witnesses, and information about conciliation and inquiry proceedings. It applies despite the Right to Information Act, 2005.
Is your committee ready to handle a conciliation request?
Check that your policy states the conciliation rule as section 10 words it. Our POSH compliance page explains the Internal Committee and the External Member role; Dr. Priya Dubey Sharma, Founder & Consulting Psychologist, offers to serve as an External Member. Take the free POSH check, or read the POSH FAQ for employers.
Sources
- The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, full text (Indian Kanoon)
- Section 10, Conciliation, of the 2013 Act (Indian Kanoon)
- Gauhati High Court, W.A. No. 149 of 2025, judgment of 9 December 2025 (court copy on Verdictum)
- Madhya Pradesh High Court on conciliation, 2024 SCC OnLine MP 7314 (SCC Times)
Plain-language guides to POSH compliance for Indian employers, based on the Act, the Rules and court rulings. POSH compliance at Manas Center is led by Dr. Priya Dubey Sharma, Founder & Consulting Psychologist, as External Member.
