THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN W.P. No.14801 of 2009 18-08-2009 BETWEEN; Legal Care Centre, rep. By its Secretary A.Manohar, Advocate ...Petitioner vs. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. By its Chief Secretary, GAD, Hyderabad and five others. ...Respondents THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN W.P.14801 OF 2009 ORAL ORDER: (Per GR,J) The writ petition is misconceived. In substance, the petitioner seeks a mandamus to the State to frame legislation to regulate and sanction the transgressions of legislative provisions to be enacted, in respect of the money laundering or ponzi schemes. Reliance for such invitation to a creative exercise of judicial power is placed on the judgments of the Supreme Court in Sodan Singh and etc., Vs. New Delhi Municipal Committee and another etc.,([1]) and L.I.C of India and another Vs. Consumer Education and Research Centre and others ([2]). We have carefully considered the arguments advanced on behalf of the petitioner and the citations proffered. The judgments referred to by the learned counsel for the petitioner do not expressly or by any implication of the text warrant an interference that the jurisdiction of the judicial branch, in particular of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India encompasses jurisdiction to issue a mandamus directing enacting of legislation. Even by the amorphous separation of powers principles that we have in the Indian constitutional scheme, no mandamus may be issued to the Legislature to enact legislation. The writ petition is misconceived and is accordingly dismissed at the stage of admission. No costs. ______________ GODA RAGHURAM,J __________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J 18th AUGUST, 2009. TSNR [1] AIR 1989(1) SC 1988 [2] AIR 1995 SUPREME COURT 1811