Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD
Andhra Lawyers Association – Appellant
Versus
Bar Council of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to nomination fee increase. (Para 2 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 2. arguments from bar council of india. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 3. impugned proceeding as executive order. (Para 21) |
| 4. court's observations on nomination fee. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 5. court's final order on nomination fees. (Para 29 , 30) |
ORDER :
GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J.
Heard Sri M.V. Raja Ram, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner in W.P.No.29216 of 2025, Sri T. Singaiah Goud, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of M/s. Yasaswi Law Associates LLP in W.P.No.30019 of 2025, Sri M. Solomon Raju, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners in W.P.No.30063 of 2025, Sri G. Venkata Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the Respondent No.1 and Sri P. Narahari Babu, learned Standing Counsel for Respondent No.2.
2. The prayers in W.P.No.29216 and 30019 of 2025 are identical. Therefore, the Prayer in W.P.No.29216 of 2025 is usefully extracted hereunder:
“It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the action of the 1st Respondent in fixing a non-refundable nom
The abrupt increase of the nomination fee for elections to Rs.1,25,000 without following due legal process violates democratic principles and is deemed arbitrary and unconstitutional.
Fees charged in excess of the statutory enrolment fee under the Advocates Act, 1961, are impermissible and unconstitutional.
The charging of enrolment fees exceeding statutory limits is impermissible and violates fundamental rights under the Constitution.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Bar Association is not amenable to the writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for an election ....
The failure to meet eligibility criteria for the Treasurer position based on practice years invalidated the nomination; compliance with Central Election Committee's directives is mandatory.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
