THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.16620 OF 2011 ORDER: The proceedings of the 1st respondent dated 07.05.2011, in so far as the 2nd respondent was directed to initiate a criminal case against the petitioner, is questioned in this Writ Petition as being arbitrary and illegal. It is wholly unnecessary to refer to the facts in detail and it would suffice to note that the Joint Collector, in his proceedings dated 07.05.2011, held that the petitioner had committed fraud in obtaining a loan from Kudumuladinnepadu PACS; and directed the Tahsildar, Kaligiri to take action for launching a criminal case against him. The said proceedings of the Joint Collector dated 07.05.2011 is said to have been passed on the basis of a complaint given to him by the Chairman of Kudumuladinnepadu PACS. Pursuant to the said proceedings of the Joint Collector on 07.05.2011, the Tahsildar gave a complaint which was registered as Cr. No.46 of 2011 at Kaligiri Police Station, Nellore District on 07.06.2011, and the matter is said to be under investigation. This Court, by order dated 17.06.2011, stayed the operation of the proceedings of the Joint Collector dated 07.05.2011 only in so far as launching prosecution against the petitioner is concerned. Sri K. Rathangapani Reddy, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, would state that, since the Joint Collector has already recorded a finding of fraud against the petitioner, the investigation, if any, carried on would only be an empty formality; the complaint made by the Chairman was only because the petitioner had discovered a fraud committed earlier by the said Chairman; and the proceedings of the Joint Collector dated 07.05.2011, and the subsequent criminal action initiated against the petitioner, are therefore required to be set aside. All that the Joint Collector has done is to direct the Tahsildar to initiate a criminal case against the petitioner, which can only be by way of filing a complaint before the Station House Officer concerned. On a complaint being filed and registered, the investigating officer is required to take up investigation, examine witnesses and then submit a final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. No law which makes the proceedings of the Joint Collector binding either on the investigating Officer or the Magistrate (in case a charge sheet is filed) has been brought to the notice of this Court. I have no reason to doubt that the investigating officer would cause investigation into the complaint independently, and not merely on the basis of the proceedings of the Joint Collector dated 07.05.2011. I see no reason, therefore, to interdict any investigation being carried on pursuant to the complaint submitted by the Tahsildar. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. The interim order passed earlier stands automatically vacated consequent to the dismissal of the Writ Petition. No costs. _____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J Date: 16.11.2011 MRKR