Vaishali Patil – Jadhav, J.

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally with the consent of the parties.

2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner assails the Government Resolution dated 05.08.2010 and termination order dated 23.03.2021, whereby the petitioner was terminated as an Anganwadi Sevika on account of her being elected as a Member of Village Panchayat and had failed to exercise option of either continuing as a Member of Village Panchayat or as a Anganwadi Sevika as provided in the Government Resolution dated 05.08.2010. This Government Resolution dated 05.08.2010 is issued by the State in view of the communication received from the Central Government to prevent Anganwadi Sevikas from simultaneously being the member of Village Panchayat and Anganwadi Sevika, since it noticed some lapse on the part of Anganwadi Sevikas who also held the post of Member of Village Panchayat in discharge of their duties. The said Government Resolution provides that if Anganwadi Sevika is elected as Member of Village Panchayat then Anganwadi Sevika should either tender resignation of the post of Member of Village Panchayat or alternatively of the post of Anganwadi Sevika. The petitioner is elected as a member of Village Panchayat and having failed to exercise the option of electing either post, her services as Anganwadi Sevika were terminated by order dated 23.03.2021.

3. In brief the facts of the case :-

The petitioner was appointed as Anganwadi Sevika in village Bondar (Korka) by order dated 11.03.1996. The petitioner got married with one Nagendra Kamble, who is resident of Village Panchayat Nasaratpur-Hassapur, which is approximately 16 km from village Bondar, where she serves as Anganwadi Sevika. In the Panchayat elections held in the year 2020, the petitioner came to be elected as Member of Village Panchayat of Nasaratpur-Hassapur. The petitioner was served with show-cause notice dated 02.03.2021 on 06.03.2021, thereby asking her to resign either from the post of Anganwadi Sevika or as a member of the Village Panchayat. The petitioner thereafter filed Writ Petition No.5840/2021 in this Court and was granted interim protection from termination by order dated 05.04.2021. Meanwhile, the petitioner was served with termination order dated 23.03.2021. Writ Petition No.5840/2021 was disposed of as the petitioner sought leave to challenge the termination order by way of separate Writ Petition. Thereafter, the petitioner filed present Writ Petition.

Submissions :-

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that both the posts i.e. Anganwadi Sevika and elected member of Village Panchayat are honorary posts and neither of them is permanent. The impugned Government Resolution is an affront to Article 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India as it is against the basic fabric of democratic set up which gives a right to every citizen to collectively bargain in participative democracy. He would submit that the Government Resolution is bad in law in absence of any restriction on a person to contest elections. He would then urge that the office of Anganwadi worker is not office of profit as Anganwadi worker receives honorarium only. Therefore, the impugned Government Resolution cannot sustain as there is no bar under Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1955 or under any rules made thereunder to continue as Village Panchayat member as well as Anganwadi Sevika. Consequently, he submits that termination order needs to be quashed and set aside.

5. Per contra, learned Advocate for respondent nos.5 and 6 and learned A.G.P. supported the impugned Government Resolution and termination order. Learned counsel for respondent nos.5 and 6 would urge that the Government Resolution is issued pursuant to the instructions received from the Central Government dated 04.06.2010 and looking at the object of the Government Resolution, there is no arbitrariness and unreasonableness in the Government Resolution as well as the consequent action of termination.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.P. for respondent no.2 and learned counsel for respondent nos.5 and 6.

Consideration and Conclusion :-

7. After hearing the parties, first question which arises for consideration is whether Anganwadi Sevika holds an office of profit and if not, whether she can hold both the posts i.e. elected member of Village Panchayat and Anganwadi Sevika simultaneously and consequently whether the impugned Government Resolution dated 05.08.2010, which prohibits holding of both the posts simultaneously needs to be quashed as arbitrary and unreasonable, correctness whereof falls for our decision.

8. The question whether Anganwadi Sevika holds an office of profit should not detain us as the same is no more res-integra. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Karnataka and others Vs. Ameerbi and others [ (2007) 11 SCC 681] has concluded that the Anganwadi Sevika does not hold a civil post and she is free to contest elections. Relevant paragraphs are quoted below :-

                   "31. One of the questions which was raised before us was in regard to the right of an Anganwadi worker to contest an election. They are indisputably free to do so. A holder of a civil post may not be entitled thereto.

                   32. In Satrucharla Chandrasekhar Raju v. Vyricherla Pradeep Kumar Dev and Anr., this Court while considering the provisions of Article 191(1)(a) of the Constitution of India in relation to the posts held by the employees of an Integrated Tribal Development Agency opined that their employees would not be holder of office of profit although the State exercises control thereover holding: )SCC pp. 427-28, para 28)

                   "28. It is also necessary to bear in mind that the Government is undertaking several projects and activities including commercial activities through the corporations and local bodies exercising some control over such corporations or bodies. In that view of the matter they may come within the meaning of the "State" envisaged in Article 12 but that may not be a decisive factor in deciding the issue. As a matter of fact Section 10 of the Representation of People Act as well as Article 58(2) of the Constitution of India do indicate that all persons employed in such undertakings, corporations or local bodies cannot be deemed to suffer disqualification for contesting the elections except to the extent indicated therein. This aspect also has been considered in some of the above-mentioned decisions. If a strict and narrow construction is to be applied that amounts to shutting off many prominent and other eligible persons to contest the elections which forms the fundamental basis for the democratic set-up. Therefore several factors as indicated above depending upon the facts of each case have to be taken into consideration in deciding whether a particular person is disqualified by virtue of his holding an office of profit before concluding that such an office is under the Government..."

                   33. The decision, therefore, is an authority for the proposition that those employees who come within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India are not necessarily government servants. A fortiori the State in terms of a scheme may exercise control over a section of the persons working but thereby only, they do not become entitled to protection under Article 311 of the Constitution of India."

9. However, the next question whether an "Anganwadi Sevika" can hold both the posts simultaneously needs more scrutiny. For this purpose, the object of Government Resolution dated 05.08.2010 needs to be considered.

10. The Government Resolution dated 05.08.2010 does not prohibit the Anganwadi Sevika from contesting the election, it simply states that on being so elected the elected member has to vacate the post of Anganwadi Sevika or has to elect between the two posts. The object behind this condition is that the Integrated Child Development Service Scheme under which Anganwadi Sevika is appointed is mainly implemented for the children aged 0-6 years and also for pregnant women and lactating mothers and for that purpose the Anganwadi Sevika are required to perform different duties daily. For example, they are required to take the weight of children, to fix nutrition position of the children and take necessary steps, to check the health of the beneficiaries, to give reference services in case of requirement, to arrange vaccination sessions, to visit the pregnant women, lactating mothers, children and tender aged girls by going to their houses and discuss health subjects and to give information about diet and health to them and to give pre-primary education in Anganwadi schools, to arrange group programmes twice in a month and prepare report of the entire work every month. Besides this, they are required to perform the duties of National functions like Pulse Polio and survey of the persons in Anganwadi zone. If the Anganwadi Sevika holds an elected post then she would not be able to give sufficient time to perform her duties as Anganwadi Sevika. Accepting the position of elected membership will not make it possible to carry out the duties and responsibilities of two positions at the same time, which would adversely affect the service object of the Integrated Child Development Service Scheme.

11. Considering the laudable object behind issuing the Government Resolution, the interpretation put up by the petitioner is not acceptable. Such a provision was then necessary in the light of the nature of services rendered by Anganwadi Sevika. Petitioner's right to contest the election is not taken away but the Government Resolution has put a condition to elect one of the post with the object that it would not be possible for a woman to satisfactorily perform the duties and responsibilities of both the posts, one of a Anganwadi Sevika and other of a elected member of Village Panchayat. If she is working on both the posts, the same will necessarily take her away from the core activities and would adversely affect the delivery of services under the Integrated Child Development Scheme. Ultimately, the society's interest and the object for which the post of Anganwadi workers is created are the reasons behind passing the Government Resolution under challenge. In view of the same, we do not find any unreasonableness or arbitrariness in the Government Resolution dated 05.08.2010 considering the object behind it. The petitioner does not have a right to continue as Anganwadi Sevika after she is elected as a member of the Village Panchayat, and continues to hold the elected post.

12. When the Court was not inclined to accept the arguments of the petitioner, the petitioner informed that she had earlier given the option for resigning from the elected post, but was terminated prior to the option being exercised. However, she has submitted her letter of resignation dated 23.01.2026 with the concerned Village Panchayat and prayed that she may be permitted to resume her duties as Anganwadi Sevika and for this petitioner relied on the judgment dated 18.07.2023 passed in Writ Petition No.8276/2022 in the case of Smt. Lata W/o Milind Khandare V/s State of Maharashtra and others, wherein the Court had permitted the petitioner therein to continue as Asha Worker subject to petitioner resigning from the elected office. We accept the prayer and adopt the similar course.

13. This Court by order dated 22.09.2021 has granted interim relief as follows :-

                   "3. In case the post held by the petitioner is not filled in, then the same shall not be filled in till the next date."

We inquired with learned counsel for Respondent Nos.5 and 6 and she confirmed that the post is not filled in and the Anganwadi Sevika from neighbouring village is only given charge for time being. The learned counsel for the respondent nos.5 and 6 also consented for reinstatement, if the petitioner resigns from the elected post. The petitioner has resigned from the elected post, by way of resignation dated 23.01.2026, which is taken on record and marked "X" for identification. In this view of the matter, subject to acceptance of the petitioner's resignation by the concerned Village Panchayat, she shall be continued as Anganwadi Sevika and would not get any arrears.

14. In the result, the termination order dated 23.03.2021 is quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute in above terms. The Writ Petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms and with above directions.