IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 590 of 2010. [O&M] Date of Decision: 21st February, 2011. The Managing Committee Baba Budha College, Bir Sahib & Anr. Petitioners through Mr. Aashish Chopra, Advocate Versus State of Punjab & Ors. Respondents through Ms. Monica Chhibbar, DAG, Punjab. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL] The Petitioner Managing Committee and its President seek a writ of prohibition to restrain the State of Punjab and its Authorities from passing any adverse order on the basis of the complaint made by respondent No. 4 – College Bachao Sangharsh Committee. The writ petition has been filed on an apprehension that the complaint of respondent No. 4 would be entertained and an Administrator of the College shall be appointed. The State of Punjab and its Authorities have filed their reply/affidavit explaining that a complaint was received from respondent No. 4 and on an inquiry it was found that one of the issue raised therein pertained to internal dispute of the College Management for which the complaint was not maintainable. However, as regard to the alleged irregularities in relation to the financial affairs of the Management, an explanation was sought but instead of giving such explanation, the petitioners have rushed to this Court. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at some length, I am of the considered view that the writ petition is wholly premature and is not maintainable at this stage. Suffice it to observe that no penal/adverse action has been taken against the petitioners by the State of Punjab or its Authorities so far. The College run by the petitioner Management receives 95% grant-in-aid from the State and as such the Education Department, Government of Punjab shall be well within their right to look into the complaints, if any, received alleging mis-utilisation, non-utilisation or siphoning of the Government funds. If such a complaint has been received and the Authorities intend to hold an inquiry, it is directed that the petitioners shall be adequately heard before any penal action is taken pursuant thereto. Disposed of. Dasti. February 21, 2011. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE