THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN W.P.No.5436 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioner seeks a direction from this Court to declare memo No.41/B1/2007 dated 27.11.2009 issued by the first respondent as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and for a consequential direction to set aside the said memo. The memo dated 27.11.2009 reads as under; “While inviting attention to the references 1-3rd cited, a copy of the reference 4th cited is herewith communicated to the Commissioner, BCW, A.P. Hyderabad and he is requested to take necessary action on the findings of the enquiry report and to prefer a complaint with the police against Sri G. Narayana for presenting forged documents and fabricating claims under Sections 468, 471, 420 read with Section 511 IPC as suggested by the Additional Director of Police, CID, A.P.Hyderabad. All that the memo requires is for the Commissioner, Backward Classes Welfare, to prefer a complaint with the police against the petitioner herein, under Sections 468, 471, 420 read with 511 IPC, for presenting forged documents and fabricating claims. Sri P.N.Murthy, learned counsel for the petitioner, would contend that a copy of the enquiry report, referred to in the impugned memo, has not even been furnished to him. He would further submit that it is only to harass the petitioner, as a counter blast to the representations submitted by him earlier, that a complaint is now sought to be lodged with the police. None of the aforesaid contentions merit acceptance. All that the impugned memo requires is for the Commissioner, Backward Classes Welfare, to prefer a complaint against the petitioner for presenting forged documents and fabricating claims. Mere filing of a criminal complaint will not result in prejudice being caused to the petitioner herein. No statutory provision which requires any report, of an enquiry held prior to a complaint being made, to be furnished as a pre-condition to the filing of the complaint, has brought to the notice of this Court. I see no reason to forestall an investigation into a complaint alleging forged documents having been presented and claims having been fabricated. Even otherwise, the petitioner can take recourse to his legal remedies if and when such a complaint is lodged. The impugned memo does not necessitate interference in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition fails and is, accordingly, dismissed. No costs. _________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J Date:09.03.2010 sj