APHC010683712025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI W.P(PIL).No.236 of 2025 Bench Sr.No:-3 [3483] Shaik Mastan Vali ...Petitioner Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...Respondents ********** Advocate for Petitioner : Sri Gundala Siva Prasad Reddy representing Sri Gangisetti Siva Rama Krishna Advocate for Respondents : Sri M. K. Raj Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the Andhra Pradesh State Bar Council, Sri S. V. S. S. Siva Ram, learned Standing Counsel for Vijayawada Municipal Corporation. CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI DATE : 24th December 2025 P C : The petitioner claims that on account of the election process which has been initiated for elections to the Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh, the contesting members, by erecting banners within and outside the Court premises, have violated Rule 36 of the Rules framed by the Bar Council of India. 2. It is stated that a representation was filed with the Bar Council of India which has not elicited any response at all. 2 3. Sri M. K. Raj Kumar, learned counsel for the Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh, however, states that no such representation, which is alleged to have been filed with the Bar Council of India, was ever filed and in case any such representation is filed, the same would certainly be considered in accordance with the Rules. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner also states that a representation has been filed with the Vijayawada Municipal Corporation, which too is denied by the learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation that such representation was ever filed. 5. The representation, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, was filed with a view to highlight the alleged installation of banners in violation of the municipal laws which are currently in vogue. 6. The present petition has been filed at a time when the election process is on. In our opinion, the petition seems to be filed for reasons which can squarely be attributed to the elections which are proposed to be held. We do not intend to interfere with the election process in any manner. However, it shall be open to the concerned authorities to consider the representation in case it is already filed and dispose of the same in accordance with law. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition (PIL) is disposed of. No costs. 3 Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ RAVI CHEEMALAPATI, J AMD 4 27 HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE & HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI W.P(PIL).No.236 of 2025 Dt:24.12.2025 AMD