HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.34163 OF 2011 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to declare the Election Notification dated 5.11.2011 issued by the Secretary for conducting election to the Bar Council of State of Andhra Pradesh, without competency or authorization as per the provisos of Bar Council Rules of Advocates Act, 1961, is illegal and arbitrary and consequently granting injunction restraining the Secretary from proceeding to hold elections in accordance with law. 2. Heard. 3. It is stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition that the petitioner has participated as a candidate in the elections held on 28.4.2006 for the membership of the Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh and she had to file a WP.No.13378 of 2006 on the malpractices and grave irregularities committed by the present Secretary of the Bar Council of A.P; that the credence of the Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh is under the control of the Secretary for quite some time; that the said Secretary is playing fraud in almost all the matters as a key person of the Bar Council ever since she was fraudulently inducted as Secretary without fulfilling requisites for holding the post of Secretary; that the question of appointment dehors the rules has been considered by the Supreme Court from time to time; that as per Section 8 of the Advocates Act, 1961, the term of office of members of State Bar Council shall be five years from the date of publication of the result of election held on 28.4.2006 and Section 8 of the Advocates Act limits the term of office bearers of a Council to five years and no more, during which it should complete the process of election for next term; that the council for the Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh has become defunct by the end of April, 2011 and election process during its term of office has not been attended and as such the Secretary being only an executive without authorization cannot exercise arbitrarily any sort of official action such as the notification of the election process suo-motu. Hence, the present writ petition is filed. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner raised two grounds viz., (i) that the Secretary of Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh is not a qualified person to hold the post and (ii) that the term of the office of the earlier Bar Council was ended by April, 2011 and the Secretary has to act in pursuance of the directions that may be given by the Bar Council and hence he prays to allow the writ petition. 5. On the other hand, the learned standing counsel appearing for the 1st respondent contended that since the term of the office of the Bar Council was expired by 2.6.2011, the Bar Council of India has extended the term of the office of the Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh till 2.12.2011 and the present notification issued on 5.11.2011 and therefore, he prays to dismiss the writ petition. 6. The present writ petition is filed on the ground that the present Secretary of the Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh is not eligible and qualified to be appointed as the Secretary. The grievance of the petitioner is that the present Secretary was fraudulently inducted as a Secretary without fulfilling the requisite qualification for holding of the post of the Secretary. In the year 2003, the present Secretary was appointed. As on today the appointment of Secretary of the Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh has not been challenged. Simply because a notice has been issued on 20.7.2009 to the Chairman, Bar Council of the State of A.P., and no reply has been issued to the said notice, that does not mean that the contents of the notice are to be admitted. There is no prima facie material at this stage to show that she is not qualified and eligible person to hold the post of Secretary and the contention of council on this aspect is devoid of merits. 7. With regard to the second contention that the term of the office of the present council was expired by the end of the month of April, 2011, the learned standing counsel appearing for the 1st respondent stated that the term of the office of the Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh has been extended by another six months by virtue of Section 8 of the Advocates Act, 1961 (for short, the Act). Section 8 of the Act reads thus: “8.Term of office of members of Bar Council.- The term of office of the elected members of a Bar Council shall be six years, but as nearly as possible one-third of the members first elected to each such Council shall retire on the expiration of every second year in the prescribed manner, and the vacancies so caused shall be filed by the election of new members in the prescribed manner.” On perusal of the above provision, it is clear that the term of the office of the State Bar Council of A.P, shall be five years from the date of publication of the results of its election. Proviso to Section 8 of the Act reads that the Bar Council of India may, by order for reasons to be recorded in writing, extend the said term, for a period not exceeding six months. 8. According to the Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent, the term of the office of the Bar Council of A.P has been extended by another six months. Whether the extension of term of the elected members of the office of the State Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh, is in accordance with law or not cannot be decided in this Writ Petition as it was not challenged. Even prior to the expiry of the term of the office of the State Bar Council of A.P. as extended, the notification is issued. The writ petition is devoid of merits. 9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed at the stage of admission. No order as to costs. _______________ K.C.BHANU,J. 29.12.2011, Gk. HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.34163 OF 2011 Date:29.12.2011 Gk.