Perils of regulating procedure by issue of rule

As reported in the TOI, about a month ago, a Judge at the Bombay High Court was aghast to find the original brief (Court copy) in the hands of an advocate, and spontaneously issued rule; stating parties not to have access to original briefs from administrative court staff. Well ! A good gesture, I have no doubt his intentions were noble; but such delicate issues, attracting ire of any Judge, prompting him to frame a rule, having the force of law, can be disastrous, if done without contemplation and deliberation in that regard. In the interest of justice (So that the rule not be abused by scheming persons) the order of that Judge has brought hardships to honest litigants, inasmuch as, if a genuinely aggrieved parte desires to peruse a brief wherein he is either petitioner or respondent, the administrative staff of the court now cite the Hon'ble Judge's order, declining perusal, unless the opponent is present, now here lies the (Abuse), "A parte who desires to procrastinate or for whatever reason wants to put a spoke in the wheel or act as a hindrance, will deliberately not make himself available thereby adversely prejudicing the applicant from perusing the petition. The rule should be for perusal of a petition any party serve notice on the other inviting their availability, within a spectrum of a week or a month; failing which the petition shall be furnished to any applicant, to be perused under scrutiny of video camera, to ensure no one tampers with any papers in any way whatsoever.