IMPORTANT POINT
The Government cannot grant prosecution sanction based on the same material after initially declining it without fresh evidence.

ORDER :

1 As the issue involved in both the Writ Petitions is one and the same, they are being taken up for hearing as well as disposed of by way of this Common Order.

2. Since the facts in both the writ petitions are similar and identical, therefore WP No. 33220 of 2014 is taken as lead case, and the facts therein hereinafter will be referred to for convenience.

3. Initially the petitioner was appointed as Excise Sub Inspector in the year 1981 and subsequently he was promoted as Excise Inspector in the year 1992 and since then the petitioner is working as such. While working as Excise Inspector at Palamaner on the allegation that certain irregularities were committed during the Excise year 2011-2012 in conducting auction of wine shops in the area of his operation, the ACB registered a case in Cr. No. 4/RCO-TCT-2012 dated 16.04.2012 and the matter was investigated into. During investigation, it came to light that the petitioner conspired with A-1 in order to obtain pecuniary advantage of him without public interest to do the official favour of overlooking various violation of Excise Laws and Rules apart from other irregularities as disclosed in the charge sheet. After completion of investigation the 2ndrespondent submitted a final report before the 1st respondent on 5.11.2012 seeking sanction for prosecution under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. It is stated that the petitioner was not shown as an accused in the FIR i.e. in Cr. No. 4/RCO-TCT/2012 and until the petitioner received summons directing the petitioner to appear before the Special Judge for ACB Cases on 17.07.2014, he has no knowledge that he was treated as accused in this case. On the requisition made by the 2nd respondent dated 5.11.2012 the 1strespondent considered the request after examining the final report, had come to conclusion that there was no prima facie for according sanction for prosecuting the petitioner before the court and accordingly directed the enquiry to be conducted by the Tribunal vide Memo No. 49991/VIGV(2)/2012 dated 21.12.2012 for disciplinary proceedings as per Rule 3(1) of A.P. Civil Services (Disciplinary Proceedings Tribunal)Act 1960 instead of criminal prosecution.

While the matter stood thus, the 1st respondent issued G.O.Ms. No. 197 dated 16.5.2014 according sanction to prosecute the petitioner for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(a) & (d) r/w 13(2) of P.C. Act 1988 and under Section 120-B and 34 IPC. Pursuant to the said sanction, a charge sheet has been filed by the 3rd respondent and basing on the same the case was taken on file against the petitioner and 3 others and the same was numbered as C.C. No. 16/2014 on the file of Special Judge for ACB Cases, Kurnool. It is further stated that the 1st respondent while according sanction to prosecute the petitioner, considered the very same material, which was earlier considered at the time of referring the matter to the Tribunal for Disciplinary proceedings. When once the 1strespondent has taken a view that the case is not fit for prosecution and accordingly directed an enquiry by the Disciplinary Tribunal, now cannot review or revise its earlier order without assigning any reason whatsoever. Hence the present writ petitions.

4. The counter affidavits are filed in both the matters, for convenience, the averments in counter in W.P. No. 33220 of 2014 are stated as under.

5. The respondents No. 2 and 3 have filed counter affidavit and denied all the allegations made in the petitions. It is stated that Cr. No. 4/RCO-TCT/12 was registered and investigated into and that after completion of investigation in this case, the Bureau sent final report to Government on 5.11.2012 recommending prosecution in respect of K. Satyanarayana, Inspector P&E, Chittoor (AO.3) and Sri KOB Prabhakar, Inspector, P&E Palamaner (AO-4) in the court of law for the offences punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(a) & (d) r/w 13(2) of P.C Act 1988 and Section 120-B and 34 IPC as they abu