Home  /  Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013  /  Section 5

Section 5: Notification of District Officer

Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 • Official Statutory Text & Practice Guide

Statutory Regulation
Legal Standard
Competent Court / Tribunal
Act 2013
Section 4 All 30 Sections of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 Section 6

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 5

Section 5 mandates the Appropriate Government to notify a District Magistrate, Additional District Magistrate, Collector, or Deputy Collector as the statutory District Officer for every administrative revenue district, establishing the central executive authority responsible for constituting Local Committees and supervising the enforcement of the Act across the unorganized and decentralized sectors.

  • Mandatory Executive Notification by Appropriate Government: Imposes a statutory obligation on the Appropriate Government (State Government or UT Administration) to issue an official gazette notification designating an officer of senior magisterial rank—specifically a District Magistrate (DM), Additional District Magistrate (ADM), Collector, or Deputy Collector—as the District Officer for every revenue district.
  • Apex Administrative Anchor for Decentralized and Informal Sectors: The District Officer serves as the statutory anchor for the unorganized sector, entrusted with the non-delegable duty to constitute the Local Committee (LC) under Section 6(1), designate Taluka/Tehsil/Block Nodal Officers under Section 6(2), disburse administrative grants under Section 8(3), receive compliance intimations under Section 22, and monitor annual reporting under Section 20 and 21.
  • Non-Delegability and Magisterial Authority: The statutory powers and supervisory responsibilities of the District Officer cannot be transferred to subordinate non-gazetted officers or private contractors; the statute deliberately links POSH enforcement to the highest revenue and executive magisterial authority of the district to ensure administrative compliance and regulatory teeth.
Key Landmark Precedents:
  • Initiative for Inclusion Foundation v. Union of India (2023 SCC OnLine SC 1361): The Supreme Court held that the notification of District Officers under Section 5 is an indispensable statutory prerequisite for operationalizing the POSH Act across India's districts; issued a writ of mandamus directing all States and Union Territories to notify District Officers in every single district within a strict 6-week deadline and widely publicize their contact details.
  • Global Health Private Limited v. Local Complaints Committee, District Indore (2020 SCC OnLine MP 4543): The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the District Officer's statutory authority under Section 5 and 6 is regulatory and administrative; the District Officer cannot act as an appellate court or dictate substantive findings to the Local Committee regarding inquiry merits.
  • Medha Kotwal Lele v. Union of India (2013) 1 SCC 297: Reiterated that the district administration bears constitutional accountability under Articles 14 and 21 to provide accessible grievance redressal mechanisms for women working in unorganized, informal, and small establishments.
Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

In practice, verify from the State Gazette or official government portal whether the District Officer has been officially notified for the district. If an establishment has fewer than 10 employees or the complaint is against the employer himself, complaints cannot be heard by an Internal Committee and must be submitted directly to the District Officer or Local Committee under Section 6. If the State has failed to notify a District Officer, file a writ petition under Article 226 citing Initiative for Inclusion Foundation.

Section 4 All 30 Sections of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 Section 6