IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI DEVINDER GUPTA, THE CHIEF JUSTICE WRIT PETITION NO : 11496 of 1994 Between: M.Balkishan Das, s/o.M.Balaiah, H.No.22-1-428/A, Kali Kabar, Inside Chaderghat, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND 1)The Union of India, rep. by Secretary to Govt., Law, Justice and Company Affairs, New Delhi. 2)Bar Council of India, rep. by its Secretary, New Delhi. 3)Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary, High Court buildings, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction essentially in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that Rule 9 of Rules framed by the Bar Council of India as arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional, ultra vires of section 24 of the Advocates Act and offending Articles 14, 19, 21, 39, 41 and 300(A) of the Constitution of India and issue a consequential direction restraining the respondents from enforcing the above alleged rule and further direct the respondents to forthwith enroll the petitioner herein as an advocate on the rolls of the Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. V.RAJ GOPAL, Advocate. Counsel for the Respondents: Mr.A.Rajasekhara Reddy, S.C. for Central Government. The Court made the following : O R D E R : The learned counsel for petitioner says that the petition has been rendered infructuous. The Writ Petition is disposed of as such. ------------------------- 08.07.2004 Copy to: 1)The Secretary to Government, Law, Justice and Company Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi. 2)The Secretary, Bar Council of India, New Delhi. 3)The Secretary, Bar Council of India, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. 4)Two CD copies. TVR/DRK