POSH Act guidelines issued in September 2021 order applied only to that case: Bombay High Court clarifies

The Bombay High Court on Thursday clarified that its order containing guidelines to protect the identities of parties in proceedings under the Sexual Harassment of Women at the Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, (POSH Act) and Rules did not have larger applicability and was confined to that particular case only..Justice Patel had in September 2021 issued detailed directions to be complied with for filing pleadings, publishing orders and accessing the same, including the hearings. The order was passed while hearing a suit which involved issues related to the POSH Act..A clarification on that order came on Thursday when the Forum against Oppression of Women sought to intervene in the suit in a representative capacity as per provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC).The application raised objection against the order, with the impression that the guidelines were general directions governing all matters under the POSH Act and Rules..Clarifying that the same was an incorrect impression, Justice Patel added that "it remained to be specifically noted" that the order was not only restricted to the present suit, but was passed by consent of both sides based on written submissions of their lawyers. "The directions had to be confined to this particular case. They could not possibly have had any larger or wider applicability for the simple reason that any such Rules of general applicability would have to be approved by the Full Court," the order stated. Justice Patel highlighted that it is only the Full Court or the Chief Justice of the High Court who could possibly issue rules. Such Rules also would have been required to be notified in the official gazette, which had not been done, he clarified.“A single judge hearing a particular matter within his rostered assignment has no authority or jurisdiction to issue any rules binding the entire Court,” the order underscored..Justice Patel stated that the "inadvertent lapses" on his part were adequately addressed by him in the subsequent order of October 2021, where he recorded about the written submissions as also the clarification that the consent order applies to the proceedings in the present matter. .Satisfied that the order addressed the concerns, the Forum did not press their application any further, and the same was disposed of. .Senior Advocate Indira Jaising with Advocates Vijay Hiremath and Swaraj Jadhav appeared for the Forum.Senior Advocate Dr Birendra Saraf with Advocates Rohan Dakshini, Shweta Jaydev, Supriya Lopes and Urvi Gupte briefed by Rashmikant Partners appeared for the defendants..In its September 2021, the Court had issued the following case-specific guidelines, among others:.Titles are to be anonymised in all further affidavits or documents by the parties; None other than Advocate-on-Record with a current vakalatnama would be permitted to inspect pleadings; All hearings will only be in chambers or in-camera through physical hearing. No online or hybrid hearings will be allowed; Order sheets not to have names of parties or witnesses, neither in titles nor in body of the order; Orders/judgments on merits will not be uploaded; Parties, advocates are "forbidden from disclosing the contents of any order, judgment or filing to the media or publishing any such material in any mode or fashion by any means, including social media, without specific leave of the court";Any breach of the guidelines by any person, including media, will be considered a contempt of court..[Read order]