JUDGMENT RAVI S. DHAVAN C.J. and S.K. SINGH J.:- This petition was filed on 25th May 1999. By one of the orders of the Court dated 18th November, 1999, a liberty was granted to the petitioner to convert this writ petition into a criminal writ petition. This liberty to convert this petition has not been acted upon. However, this would not make any difference as the Court is prepared to consider the matter as it is notwithstanding the fact that the petitioner may have not converted the petition as one under civil jurisdiction to that under criminal jurisdiction for the simple reason that in any case he was invoking a prerogative writ jurisdiction of the High Court. 2. The reliefs which the petitioner prays, in fact, are that (a) no First Information Report should be filed against him under the Prevention of Corruption Act and (b) no vigilance enquiry should be instituted. 3. The question is what has the petitioner done that he should be so apprehensive that there is a possibility of a First Information Report being filed against him as also vigilance enquiry. 4. It appears from the record that the petitioner had opened an educational institution and gone about the business of running a College, which, apparently, has not been recognised. Beyond this, this Court will not wsay as the matter appears to be pending under vigilance and the petitioner has much to answer for having opened a College, which possibly would mean that he may have realised fees from the students but could not take an examination as the College was not being recognised. This prophylactic guard with the petitioner is seeking from the High Court that there should be no enquiry or investigation and but a restraint upon the State that a First Information Report should not be filed and simultaneously no vigilance enquiry should proceed in an abuse of the process of the Court and the writ jurisdiction of the High Court. 5. 5. If the vigilance department comes to the conclusion that a First Information Report had been filed and vigilance enquiry had been initaiated and the petitioner had been informed about all this prior to the filing of this writ or any other petition, then the vigilance department will be entitled to take out a proceeding for perjury against the petitioner under Chapter XI of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and this proceedings will run independent of any other First Information Report or vigilance enquiry. 6. This petition is dismissed with costs.