A PIL challenged bar associations in Andhra Pradesh going on strike in protest against the Andhra Pradesh Land Titling Act, 2023, and sought action against them and framing of rules under the Advocates Act. The petitioner stated all bar associations had resumed work, and the High Court closed the petition without costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR ^
PRESENT
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE AND
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
WP(PIL) NO: 199 OF 2023
Between:
Thandava Yogesh, S/o. Venkateswarlu, Aged 38 years, Occ; Advocate, R/o.2133, Near Vinayaka Temple, Amaravathi Road, Peddaparimi (V), Thullur Mandal, Guntur District-522236 Ph 9491783736, Aadhar 5105-5458-4458, SBI A/c 20022823442, PAN Number ACIPY5308D, e-mail [email protected]
... PETITIONER
AND
2
3
- The Tadepalligudem Bar Association, Rep by General secretary, Civil Court Complex, West Godavari, 534101
- Kovvuri Appi Reddy, President of Tadepalligudem Bar Association Civil Court Complex, West Godavari, 534101
- Dasam Suneel Kumar, General secretary of TadepalligudemBar Association, Civil Court Complex, West Godavari, 534101
- The Anakapalle Bar Association, Rep By General Secretary, Court Complex, Anakapalle, 531001.
- Sura Srinivas, General Secretary of Anakapalle BarAssociation Court Complex, Anakapalle, 531001.
- The Markapur Bar Association, Rep by General Secretary,Court Complex, Markapur, 523316.
- M. Anwar Baig, General Secretary of Markapur Bar Association, Court Complex, Markapur, 523316.
- The Ongole Bar Association, Rep by General Secretary,Seetha Ram Puram, Devuni Cheru, Ongole, 523001.
- Duvvuri Nageswara Rao, Genera Secretary of Ongole Bar Association, Seetha Ram Puram, Devuni Cheru, Ongole,523001.
- The Srikalahasti Bar Association, Rep by General Secretary, Muthyalamma Street, Srikalahasti, Tirupati, 517644.
4
- The Kovvuru Bar Association, Rep by General Secretary, Court, Complex, Kovvuru, East Godavari, 534350.
- Bobba Barati, President of Kovvuru Bar Association,Court Complex, Kovvuru, East Godavari, 534350.
- The Bezawada Bar Association, Rep by General Secretary,Civil Court Complex, Governorpet, Vijayawada, 520002.
- Jannu Sridhar, General Secretary of Bezawada Bar Association Civil Court Complex, Governorpet, Vijayawada, 520002.
The Machilipatnam Bar Association., Rep By General secretary, Srinivas Nagar Colony, Machilipatnam, 521002.
- Hah Babu Tungala, President of Machilipatnam Bar association, Srinivas Nagar Colony, Machilipatnam, 521002.
- Raghu Ram Kotti, General Secretary of MachilipatnamBar Association, Srinivas Nagar Colony, Machilipatnam,521002.
- The Badvel Bar association, . Rep By General secretary.Court Complex Badvel, 516227.
5
'4
- V Suryanarayana Reddy, General Secretary of BadvelBar association, Court Complex Badvel, 516227.
- The Gudivada Bar Association, Rep by General Secretary,Court Complex, Guivada, 521301. Thummalacharla Srinivasulu, President of Gudivada Bar Association, Court Complex, Guivada, 521301.
Thummalacharla Srinivasulu, President of Gudivada Bar Association, Court Complex, Guivada, 521301.
Chennuri Venkata Ramana, General Seretary of GudivadaBar Association, Court Complex, Guivada, 521301.
- The Guntur Bar Association, Represented by its President, District Court Complex, Guntur.
(Respondent No.48 impleaded (suo-moto) as per CourtOrder dated. 16/03/2024 in WP(PIL).No. 199 of 2023)
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the unofficial respondents in passing resolutions calling for boycotting the court works ISi: illegal and contemptuous and they lost right to be the president and General secretary of their respective bar associations and the inaction of the respondents 2 to 5 in taking action on the unofficial respondents and other bar associations who have passed resolutions to boycott judicial work despite the same is held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal V. Union of India (2003) 2 SCC 45, Common Cause, A Registered Society V. Union of India (2006) 9 SCC 295, Krishnakant Tamrakar V. State of M.P. (2018) 17 SCC 27 as illegal and not framing rules u/s. 34 of the Advocates Act is illegal, arbitrary and violation of Art.14, 21, 141, 144 of Constitution of India and violation of Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment in Ex-
6
Capt. Harish Uppal v. Union of India (2003) 2 SCC 45,CommonCause,A Registered Society v. Union of India (2006) 9 SCC 295, Krishnakant Tamrakar v. State of M.P. (2018) 17 SCC 27, consequentlydirectthe2nd and 3rd respondent to frame rules u/s.34 of the Advocates Act by making it clear that strike by advocate/advocates would be consideredinterference with administration of justice and concerned advocate/advocates may be barred from practicing before Courts in a district or in the High Court, 2nd and 3rd respondent to get real time information fromtheJudicialOfficeror Administrative Head of a Concerned court or court complexandsendthe same to 3rd and 4th respondents for suspending or removingtheexecutive committee of the concerned bar association or suspendingthelicenseofthe advocate or advocates, 4th and 5th respondent to take action against the unofficial respondents by terminating the Executive Committees of the respective bar associations and 4th and 5th respondenttotakeactionon the advocate/advocates or Executive Committees of Bar Associations if they call for any strike or boycott of judicial work inatimeboundmanneralter receiving information from 2nd and 3rd respondents.
lA NO: 1 OF 2024
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 4th respondent to suspend theexecutivebodiesofBar Associations of Andhra Pradesh that are boycotting the judicial work after obtaining the information from the 2rd and 3rd respondents and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to make sure the judicial work is not stopped.
Counsel for the Petitioner(s): SRI THANDAVA YOGESH (PARTY IN
PERSON)
Counsel for the Respondents 1 : GP FOR LAW LEGISLATIVEAFFAIRS
Counsel for the Respondents 2 &3 : SRI VIVEK CHANDRASEKHAR
7
Counsel for the Respondents 4 : SRI G VENKATA REDDY,SCFOR APBC
Counsel for the Respondents 5 : SRI MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM, SC FOR BCI
Counsel for the Respondents 6 & 7 : SRI P SIVA SAISWARUP
Counsel for the Respondents 9 to 11 : SRI HARISH KUMARRASINENI
Counsel for the Respondents 15 to 17 : SRI YALLABANDIRAMATIRTHA
Counsel for the Respondents 18 & 19 : SRI V SATYANARAYANA NEKKANTI
Counsel for the Respondents 27 to 29 : SRI CH. NAGENDRAMU
Counsel for the Respondents 30 to 32 : SRI M PITCHAIAH
Counsel for the Respondents 33 to 35 : SRI MANGENASREERAMA RAO
Counsel for the Respondents 36 & 38 : SRI BOLLA VENKATARAMA RAO
Counsel for the Respondents 37 : SRI G.L NAGESWARARAO
Counsel for the Respondents 40 & 41 : SRI AKULA VAMSIKRISHNA
Counsel for the Respondents 45 & 47 : M/S THOTA SUNEETHA
Counsel for the Respondents 46 : SRI P.A. SESHU
Counsel for the Respondents 8,12 to 14, 20 to 26, 39,42to44 : -
The Court made the following: ORDER
%
APHC010588472023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH Sr.No:-30 [3446] AT AMARAVATI
WP(PIL) NO: 199/2023
Thandava Yogesh ...PETITIONER
Vs. The State of AP and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Petitioner appeared as Party in Person.
G Venkata Reddy, Advocate for Respondent No.4.
Maheswara Rao Kuncheam, Advocate for Respondent No.5.
CORAM :THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
DATE : 3^^ April, 2024
PC :
One of the main issues that was highlighted in the present petition was with regard to the various Bar Associations in the State of Andhra Pradesh going on strike in purported protest against the Andhra Pradesh Land Titling Act, 2023.
Petitioner appearing in person now states that alltheBarAssociations
had resumed the work.
In that view of the matter, nothing survives in the present petition, which ■j
is accordingly closed. No order as to costs.
2
Ha & RRRJ WP(PIL)_199_2023
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
//TRUE COPY//
SD/- S.SRINIVASA PRASAD ASSISTA^^REGISTRAR
SEC TION OFFICER
To,
HIGH COURT
DATED:03/04/2024
ORDER
WP(PIL).No.199 of 2023
^0
■■€0o •t
is
k-'A,
\ 7 may 20^*1
CLOSING THE WP(PIL) WITHOUT COSTS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the PIL concerning bar associations boycotting judicial work remained necessary after the associations resumed work?
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Thandava Yogesh
The State of AP
Dhiraj Singh Thakur
R Raghunandan Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
