Disposed

Sri Akula Anil Srinivas v. The Bar Council of State of Telangana

Telangana HC19 Mar 2019WP/5375/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by a lawyer challenging the Bar Council's non-consideration of his representation for changing his place of practice to effectuate the Supreme Court's 'one bar-one vote' directive. The counsel for the Bar Council undertook to verify the list and take steps, leading to the petition's dismissal.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition is disposed of. The 1st Respondent is directed to verify the list and take appropriate steps on the representation.

Sri Akula Anil Srinivas Vs The Bar Council of State… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2019)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.5375 of 2019

¶3

ORDER :

¶4

This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking to declare the action of the 1^st respondent in not considering the representation of the petitioner, dated 14.02.2019, for change of place of practice from Nampally Criminal Courts, Hyderabad, to High Court of Telangana, Hyderabad, for implementation of ‘one bar-one vote’ as directed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, thereby curtailing the right of the petitioner to vote in the ensuing elections of the 3^rd respondent, as arbitrary and illegal and consequently direct respondent Nos.1 to 3 to consider the aforesaid representation made by the petitioner.

¶5

Heard Sri Naveen Souda, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri G.M.Mohiuddin, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent and Smt. S.Nanda, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondent.

¶6

The grievance of the petitioner is that though he filed a representation on 14.02.2019 before the 1^st respondent to include his name in the COP as well as in the voter list of the 3^rd respondent by changing his place of practice from Nampally Criminal Courts, Hyderabad, to High Court of Telangana, Hyderabad, by submitting all necessary documents, the same is still pending before the 1^st respondent.

¶7

¶8

Sri G.M.Mohiuddin, learned Standing Counsel, who takes notice on behalf of the 1^st respondent, would submit that the 1^st respondent will verify the list and take appropriate steps on the representation, dated 14.02.2019, said to have been submitted by the petitioner, in accordance with the Rules of the Bar Council.

¶9

Recording the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel for the 1^st respondent, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶10

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition

¶11

shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶12

____________________________
CHALLA KODANDA RAM, J
MARCH 19, 2019
Note:
Furnish C.C. in two days.
(b/o)
YVL

¶13

¶14

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM

¶15

WRIT PETITION No.5375 of 2019

¶16

Date:19.03.2019

¶17

YVL

Sri Akula Anil Srinivas v. The Bar Council of State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Akula Anil Srinivas v. The Bar Council of State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri P. Sudershan Vs The State of Telangana

Sri Srinivasa Nagar Colony Welfare Association Vs The State of Telangana

Denda Upender Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Sri T. Chandramouli Vs The State of Telangana

D.Girija Vs The Bar Council of State of Telangana

Azam Pasha, Vs The State of Telangna