Can the complainant appeal?

The Bombay High Court says yes.

In Anup Vikal v. State of Maharashtra (19 August 2026), the Court held that an ICC's threshold rejection of a complaint is a "recommendation" under Section 13(2), and is therefore appealable under Section 18 of the POSH Act.

The reasoning is straightforward:

- Section 11 says the ICC "shall" inquire. It is a duty, not a discretion.

- If skipping the inquiry took a decision outside the meaning of "recommendation," every committee could make its rejections appeal-proof.

- POSH is welfare legislation, so doubts are resolved in favour of the woman it protects.

- The possibility of a writ under Article 226 cannot defeat a statutory right of appeal.

The Court also drew a clear line stating that maintainability is not merits. Whether the complaint actually discloses sexual harassment is a question for the appellate forum to decide.

The Court held the Section 18 appeal maintainable, set aside the Industrial Court's order in part for deciding merits when only maintainability was argued, and remanded the appeal for fresh decision on merits, preferably within 4 months, with all contentions kept open.

The takeaway for employers and Internal Committees is:

A threshold rejection is still a decision, and it will be open to appellate scrutiny.