SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 58351

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH,THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.M. MOHIUDDIN
Padma Rao Putta – Appellant
Versus
The Union Government of India – Respondent
WP 39647/2025



##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD

THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH

AND

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN

I.A.No.2 of 2025

in/and

WRIT PETITION No.39647 of 2025

DATE: 31.12.2025

BETWEEN:

Padma Rao Putta

….Petitioner

AND

Union of India and 4 others.

….Respondents

ORDER

Heard Sri Ch. Prabhakar, learned counsel representing Sri. N.

Sreenivasa Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri Narasimha

Sharma, learned Additional Solicitor General of India representing

Sri N.Bhujanga Rao, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India

appearing for respondent No.1; Sri Aadesh Varma, learned counsel

appearing for respondent No.2 and Sri S. Ashok Anand Kumar,

learned Senior Counsel representing Sri J.Manikanta Reddy

appearing for respondent Nos.4 and 5 and perused the record.

2. The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus

declaring the Election Notification dated 20.12.2025 issued by the

##PAGE2##

::2::

Bar Council of Telangana, insofar as it fails to provide reservation to

advocates belonging to the Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled

Tribes (STs), as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of constitutional

mandates.

Factual matrix (in brief)

3. The petitioner, an advocate by profession and the President of

a lawyers’ organization i.e, National Samatha Lawyers Organization,

had earlier approached this Court by filing W.P.No.34809 of 2025

seeking reliefs of a similar nature. The said writ petition was

disposed of vide order dated 08.12.2025, observing that the Bar

Council of India has already seized of the petitioner’s representation

and directing that an informed decision be taken thereon within a

reasonable time.

4. Notwithstanding the aforesaid order, the respondent No.4 has

issued the impugned Election notification dated 20.12.2025,

notifying elections to the State Bar Council to be held on 30.01.2026.

The issuance of the said notification is stated to be in compliance

with the directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in

M. Varadhan v. Union of India and another1

5. In the said order, the Hon’ble Supreme Court laid down a

comprehensive mechanism and strict timelines for the conduct of

1

W.P.(Civil) No. 1319 of 2023 and batch, dated 18.11.2025.

##PAGE3##

::3::

elections to various State Bar Councils, including the constitution of

High-Powered Election Committees and a Supervisory Committee.

Insofar as the State of Telangana is concerned, the election process

is required to be conducted under the supervision of the High-

Powered Election Committee – Phase I, with a mandate to complete

the entire election process on or before 31.01.2026.

6. Aggrieved by the non-provision of reservation for advocates

belonging to the SCs and STs in the impugned Election notification,

the petitioner has instituted the present writ petition, along with an

interlocutory application vide I.A.No.2 of 2025, seeking interim

directions to provide reservation to the extent of 15% for Scheduled

Castes and 7% for Scheduled Tribes in the ongoing election process.

Contentions of the petitioner

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner raised the following

contentions:

i. That reservation in favour of advocates belonging to the SCs

and STs is constitutionally envisaged under Articles 14, 15, 16,

341 and 342 of the Constitution of India, read with the

provisions of the Representation of the People Acts, 1950 and

1951. It is urged that the Bar Council, being a statutory and

representative body, is required to mirror social diversity and

##PAGE4##

::4::

ensure inclusive and equitable participation of all sections of

the legal fraternity.

ii. That the directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court

merely prescribe a time-bound framework for completion of the

election process and do not, either expressly or by necessary

implication, prohibit the provision of reservation. According to

the petitioner, the absence of any such prohibition obligates

the respondents to implement reservation even at the present

stage.

iii. That th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top