IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.1727 of 2010 Date of Decision: 08.10.2010 Sh. Narsing Dass Sanatan Dharam Raghukul High School Society ........Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others .......Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI Present: Mr. Jagram Singh Cooner, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.D.Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for respondents No.1 to 4. Mr. Vivek Suri, Advocate for respondent No.5. ****** PERMOD KOHLI, J.(Oral) The petitioner is a society, registered under the Society Registration Act and is managing school i.e. Sh. N.D.S.D.R. High School at Village and Post Office Segti, District Ambala. This petition has been filed challenging the letters/notices (Annexures P-1, P-2 & P-3). Vide Annexure P- 1, District Education Officer, Ambala has requested the Commissioner & Director General, School Education, Haryana for appointment of Administrator of the school in view of certain complaints having been received against the management of this school. Second communication has been issued by the District Education Officer to the Manager of the school asking for the para wise reply in respect to the complaint received against the Managing Committee. Vide Annexure P-3, again the Manager of the school has been asked to explain regarding violation of the order. The petitioner without submitting reply to the aforementioned communications/letters has filed this petition seeking to challenge the same. As a matter of fact, this CWP No.1727 of 2010 -2- petition is pre-mature. The respondents are yet to take any final decision. Section 10 of the Higher School Education Act, 1995 empowers the Director, Education to take over the management of the school, if the management is indulging in any financial irregularity or administrative mis-management or on account of neglect to perform the duty etc. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents are interfering in the management. So far, there is nothing on record to indicate that the authorities have interfered in the management of the school. The authorities on receipt of complaint only put the petitioner to notice and sought explanation. Such an action does not amount to interference in management. In view of the above circumstances, this writ is pre-mature. It is, however, made clear that the respondents will issue a fresh Show Cause Notice giving all the details of alleged mis-management to the petitioner- Society along with copy of the complaint, seeking explanation of the petitioner in accordance with the provisions of Section 10 or any other provisions as may be applicable in this regard. The petitioner shall be provided sufficient opportunity to explain the position. Respondents will proceed to decide the matter in accordance with law. . 08.10.2010 (PERMOD KOHLI) Gagan JUDGE