The Calcutta High Court on Monday pulled up an advocate for filing a "premature" public interest litigation (PIL) alleging that the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) was not being implemented in its letter and spirit in the High Court and also the lower judiciary. .A Division Bench of Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya said that advocates should avoid making any attempt to 'shame the institution' by filing such petitions."If you want to shame the institution, please understand, you are shaming yourself. Tell me who has sponsored this PIL? Is there someone else, who is firing off the petitioner's shoulder? Is this PIL filed due to the recent incidents? You cannot shame the institution. This is a sensitive issue," the Chief Justice observed orally..The Bench was particularly irked by the submission made by the counsel that there is no 'formal' order available in the court records to indicate the constitution of an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) for the State's judiciary.Taking exception to the argument, the Chief Justice said,"You are wrong. The correct statement should be no formal order is 'traceable' and not that it is not available. Please ensure you make correct submissions. The ICC is very much functional. In fact, it is functioning even on Saturdays, sometimes.".On the point of records, the Chief Justice went on make remarks against advocates for their 'poor record management.'"Have you seen how well you advocates have maintained the records? How responsible are the lawyers here? You see how the corridors are full of case papers, one cannot walk from this side of the corridor to the other. Despite repeated requests, there has been no change and advocates continue to dump your case papers in the corridors. There is a manner to function," the Bench remarked..The petitioner alleged that he received 'confusing data' in response to an application under the Right to Information (RTI) Act seeking details on the constitution of ICCs in the State judiciary."If you think the RTI response given by the Public Information Officer (PIO) isn't proper, you can make a representation to the Registrar instead of shaming the institution by filing such a PIL. This PIL deserves dismissal with costs as it is absolutely premature," the Court underscored.However, the petitioner's counsel apologised to the Court and sought permission to withdraw his PIL.The Bench, therefore, allowed the same.