(1) HEARD counsel for the petitioners as well as the counsel for the respondents. We see no reason to entertain this special leave petition. It is established by the decision of this court in Synthetics and Chemicals Ltd. v. State of U.P. that so far as the industrial alcohol is concerned, the power of licencing vests in the Union of India alone. At the same time it is held that the power of the State government to legislate with respect to potable liquor referable to Entry 8 of List II remains unaffected. It is also held that the State has the power to make regulations and to take appropriate action to ensure that non-potable alcohol is not diverted and misused as a substitute for potable alcohol. Another principle enunciated in the said decision is that the State can, not only charge excise duty on potable alcohol and sales tax on sales of such potable alcohol, but is also entitled, in cases it renders any service, as distinct from its claim of grant of privilege, to charge fees based on quid pro quo. The High court in this case has merely reiterated the said principles. It has held "that the central government has the exclusive power to grant a licence for the manufactur