The court clarified that the term "employee" includes individuals employed under contract, regardless of the principal employer's knowledge. In a notable case involving allegations of sexual harassment against an OLA driver, the court highlighted OLA's commitment to ensuring proper training and safety for its driver-partners, as stated in the company's response to the victim.

The ruling pointed out that OLA's Subscription Agreement and customer agreements do not absolve the company of responsibility regarding complaints or incidents during rides, despite OLA's previous claims that its driver-partners are independent contractors, thus exempting them from the provisions of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act).

The case stemmed from a writ petition filed by a woman alleging sexual harassment by an OLA cab driver in 2019. The Internal Complaint Committee (ICC) of ANI Technologies, OLA's parent company, had previously ignored her complaint, citing a lack of jurisdiction due to the driver's alleged status as an independent contractor.

The court condemned the ICC for its negligence in handling the complaint, which involved an impersonator driving the cab, who violated the Subscription Agreement. The court noted that OLA had acknowledged the prevalence of driver-swapping incidents but failed to take necessary measures to address this issue.

Consequently, the court ruled that OLA and its ICC were guilty of deliberate negligence and ordered them to compensate the victim ₹5 lakh. The court also mandated that the ICC conduct a thorough inquiry into the complaint under the POSH Act within 90 days while ensuring the confidentiality of those involved, in accordance with Section 16 of the POSH Act.

Case Title: XXX v. ICC, ANI Technologies Pvt. Ltd. and Others