1. These Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India are in challenge of orders passed by the learned Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Thiruvananthapuram (for short, "the Special Judge") under Sec. 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, "the Code") directing the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau (for short, "the V&ACB") to conduct a preliminary enquiry and register a case if materials indicating commission of offences as alleged in the private complaints are disclosed and if not, report the matter to the learned Special Judge. The following questions of law are urged for a decision:

I. Whether, in view of Sec. 68A of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act,1969 (for short, "the Act") it was within the power of learned Special Judge to direct the V&ACB to conduct an enquiry/investigation and the V&ACB to enquire/investigate into matters relating to a Co-operative Society registered under the Act?

II. Whether, it was within the power of learned Special Judge to direct a preliminary enquiry to be conducted by the V&ACB before registering a case while passing an order under Sec. 156(3) of the Code?

2. Some facts are necessary for appreciation of the contentions and decision of the questions raised.

3. In W.P.(C) No.8472 of 2011, respondent No.4 filed Ext.P2, complaint against petitioners and two others. Gist of the allegations is that manipulating the admission register of Vanchinadu Housing Co-operative Society (for short, "the Society"), names of certain persons were incorporated in the said Register to make it appear that they were duly enrolled as members of the said Society and to facilitate that, applications preferred by the real members of the Society were manipulated. Petitioners (public servants connected with the Society) and others did so, for illegal gratification. Respondent No.4 alleged that petitioners and others committed offences punishable under Secs.120B, 465, 468, 470 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, "the IPC") and Sec.13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, "the PC Act"). On receipt of Ext.P2, complaint learned Special Judge passed Ext.P3, order dated March, 30, 2010. Ext.P3, order reads as follows:

"This complaint is forwarded u/s.156(3) crlpc to the Director, Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau for conducting a Vigilance Enquiry into the allegations raised in the complaint. If materials are collected warranting investigation, a case shall be registered and FIR forwarded to this court and then proceed with investigation. If no materials are available to conduct investigation, a report shall be submitted within three months."

Pursuant to Ext.P3, order a Vigilance Officer conducted a quick verification (or enquiry, as it is called) and submitted Ext.P4, report to the Director, V&ACB through proper channel (Superintendent of the V&ACB). In that report, the Vigilance Officer stated that his enquiry revealed commission of offences punishable under Secs.465, 468, 471 and 120B of the IPC (regarding fake membership of the Society) but, no evidence could be obtained for commission of criminal misconduct (punishable under the PC Act) against petitioners. Other accused in Ext.P2, complaint were exonerated in that report. The Superintendent of the V&ACB forwarded the said report to the Director, V&ACB vide Ext.P5 reiterating the conclusions in Ext.P4, report and recommending that the local Police may register a case against petitioners for offences punishable under the IPC. The Director, V&ACB forwarded the report to the Additional Chief Secretary to the Government vide Ext.P5(a), report dated 16.11.2010 with copy to the Superintendent of Police, Southern Range, Thiruvananthapuram. Based on the said report, the Vanchiyoor Police registered Ext.P6, FIR against petitioners for offences punishable under Secs. 468, 471 and 120B read with Sec. 34 of the IPC. The suo motu report prepared by the Sub Inspector, Vanchiyoor is appended to