What Legislature has provided executive is bound to implement, but not to impede.

KalyanJyoti Sengupta, J.

This public interest litigation has been filed in the year 2012 asking the following reliefs:

(i) “To issue necessary directions and guidelines to ensure the functional independence and integrity of the 3rd respondent institution in registration, investigation and prosecution of public servants accused of offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the matters connected therewith;

(ii) to monitor the investigation into bribes received by public servants and others from liquor syndicates in the State by issuing continuing Mandamus to ensure that the 3rd respondent carries out their public duty to investigate into the offences disclosed against all the persons involved irrespective of their status and position in the Government and society and to ensure the logical conclusion to the investigations;

(iii) to declare the Para No.2(i) & (ii) of the Memo No.595/SPL.B3/99-2, dated 29.12.1999 issued by the 1st respondent with regard to the registration of cases against Members of Legislatures, as arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction, ultra vires the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act and Criminal Procedure Code and contrary to Article 14 of the Constitution of India and to set aside the same;

(iv) to direct review of all the cases during the period from 2003 onwards where the government deviated from the 3rd respondent recommendation of prosecution of public servants under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 by laying down guidelines for the same.”

2. The petition was necessitated to be filed on the following facts as stated by the petitioner in the affidavit filed along with the petition. It is stated that major source of revenue to the State is excise duty on the liquor and the licence fee on the retail sale of liquor and Bars. The contribution to the revenue during the financial year was nearly to the tune of Rs.11,000/ crores. The competition among the liquor traders led to quoting high licence fees in the auctions and consequent indulgence of the shop owner in various illegal activities to increase the sales and to garner more profits. The retail shops owners have formed cartel in towns, mandals and villages known as liquor syndicates and indulging in various illegal activities and turned the State in collusion with excise, police, revenue, legal metrology and politicians in Madya Andhra Pradesh instead of Haritha Andhra Pradesh. The health and productivity of the common man has affected badly due to high consumption of liquor. Some of the illegal activities carried out by the liquor syndicates are stated as follows:

(i) Selling of the liquor over and above the MRP

(ii) Violation of the opening and closing hours of the shops and bars

(iii) Loose sales of the liquor at the shops and its consumption

(iv) Sale of non-duty paid liquor.

(v) Operation of belt shops

(vi) Sale of duplicate liquor

The above activities are all in violation of liquor licence conditions, the Excise Act and the M.R.P. Legislation. The above violations and illegal activities ensured high returns to the liquor traders. The above activities are not possible unless money is paid to the officers belonging to the excise, police, revenue, metrology, local public representatives, local Ministers etc. The members of the liquor syndicates are making monthly payments to the enforcement agencies and regular staff of the police, excise and other departments and local politicians to turn a blind eye to the violation of law and fleece of the common man. The illegal trade in the liquor is not possible without making monthly payments to the local Legislators, Member of Parliament, local, Minister and other public representatives. Periodical payments are being made to the concerned Minister also. The liquor business has turned out to be lucrative to the State Government, its Officers and politicians. Thus, a nexus is formed between the liquor businessmen, the law enforcement agencies and the politicians.

3