G. Rohini, J.

This writ petition is filed by way of public interest litigation seeking a Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents 1 to 6 in initiating penal action against the respondent No.8 and his associates i.e., respondents 9 to 20 under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the Money Laundering Act, 2002 and other applicable penal laws is illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 6 to initiate proceedings under law including a direction to the respondent No.4 to conduct an investigation / probe in respect of allotment of lands, granting of licenses, decisions of disinvestment and amassing disproportionate wealth and assets by the respondents 8 to 10 and the involvement of the respondents 11 to 20 and prosecute the unofficial respondents and others in accordance with law.

Pending disposal of the writ petition, the petitioner sought an interim direction to the respondent No.4 to conduct a preliminary enquiry into the subject matter and submit a preliminary enquiry report to this Hon’ble Court in regard to the acts of omission and commission of the respondent No.8 during his tenure as Chief Minister of the State including in the matter of allotment of lands, grant of contracts, conferment of incentives and concessions and benami holdings of the respondent No.8 and his family members.

At the stage of admission, an elaborate order was passed by this Court on 14.11.2011. Admittedly the respondents were not heard before passing the said order. The operative portion of the order dated 14.11.2011 reads as under:

“10. We have bestowed our anxious consideration to the various statements of fact and the legal principles on the subject. We are of the opinion that the petitioner has made out a case of misuse and or abuse of power and also acts of indulgence shown by the 8th respondent, warranting admission of this writ petition. Accordingly, we admit this writ petition and issue Rule Nisi.

1. 11. However, we are of the opinion that respondents 3, 4, 5 and 6 should be directed to independently carry out necessary inquiries / investigation into the various acts alleged to have been committed and attributed to respondents 8 to 20 in the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition based upon the documents enclosed as material papers of this writ petition, before an opinion can be firmed up about the criminal culpability. Let the investigation be carried out and a report be submitted by each of the respondents 3 to 6 in sealed covers for further consideration of this Court, to enable it to take appropriate and necessary further action in the matter. For this purpose, we grant respondents 3 to 6, three months time.

2. 12. Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to deposit eight more sets of the paper

book filed in the writ petition together with the material papers exhibited along therewith within one week from today, so that the Registrar (Judicial) will make available to the respondents 3 to 6 two such sets apace. Call the matter for further consideration after three months.” (emphasis supplied)

It is to be noticed that respondent No.4 in the writ petition is the Central Bureau of Investigation, New Delhi; whereas the respondents 3, 5 & 6 are the Government of A.P., represented by its Principal Secretary, Home Department; the Enforcement Directorate represented by its Director, New Delhi and the Director General of Police, A.P., Hyderabad respectively.

Aggrieved by the above said order, dated 14.11.2011, the respondents 11, 12, 17 & 20 carried the matter to the Supreme Court. By order dated 23.11.2011 the Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petitions observing that the petitioners would be at liberty to approach this Court for modification/vacating the order dated 14.11.2011 and that their applications be disposed of within 15 days from the date of filing of the same.

In pursuance thereof, the respondents 11, 12, 17, & 20 filed WVMP.Nos.4348, 4418 & 43