R.M. Borde, J.

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for respective parties.

2. The petitioner is praying to quash notification dated 01.01.2014 and consequential orders of removal communicated by the Deputy Commissioner of Child Development, Maharashtra State, Pune, District Women and Child Development Officer, Aurangabad, on 24.01.2014, thereby directing termination of petitioner from the post of Chairperson of Child Welfare Committee, Aurangabad.

3. The petitioner came to be appointed as a Member of Child Welfare Committee, Aurangabad, by virtue of Notification issued in that behalf by the State Government on 02.06.2008. It is the contention of the petitioner that there were certain complaints received against the then Chairperson and Members of the Child Welfare Committee, Aurangabad. In pursuance thereof, a show cause notice came to be issued on 08.02.2010 by the Commissioner, Women and Child Development Department, Maharashtra State, Pune. The concerned Members and Chairperson were directed to submit their explanation within three days from the date of receipt of the notice. The petitioner submitted her explanation and denied allegation as against her on 02.03.2010. While concluding those proceedings, action of removal was taken against then Chairperson Smt.Usha Mahajan and Member Smt.Madhura Anvikar. So far as petitioner is concerned, at the relevant time, no action was taken against her. The term of earlier Committee, of which petitioner was also a part, came to an end and as such, by virtue of notification issued by the State, a new Child Welfare Committee came to be constituted. The petitioner came to be appointed as Chairperson of the said Committee since 04.05.2013.

4. The petitioner contends that she was shocked and surprised to receive notification on 01.01.2014 directing her removal from the post of Chairperson of the Child Welfare Committee, Aurangabad. It is recorded in the notification issued, in that behalf, that an inquiry came to be conducted by the State Advisory Board against the Chairperson i.e. petitioner and it was found that in view of several complaints received against her and on finding that there is substance in the complaints, the State Advisory Board recommended termination of the petitioner from the post of Chair Person of Child Welfare Committee, Aurangabad. The State Government, as such, took a decision to terminate the petitioner from the post of Chairperson of Child Welfare Committee, Aurangabad.

5. The petitioner contends that the allegations, if any, received by the Advisory Board, are directed as against the earlier body and tenure of the earlier Committee came to an end and thereafter petitioner came to be appointed once again by issuing a fresh notification for a term of three years commencing from 04.05.2013. The petitioner contends that no action can be initiated against her on the basis of complaints received concerning alleged irregularities committed by the erstwhile Committee. The tenure of the erstwhile Committee, having come to an end in the month of April 2013, no action can be initiated or taken against the petitioner, who is a part of new Committee constituted by the State Government.

6. It is further contended by the petitioner that action taken against her is not in consonance with Rule 92 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 read with Section 29 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000.

7. An affidavit-in-reply has been presented by the District Women and Child Welfare Officer, Aurangabad, on behalf of Respondents. It is contended in the affidavit-in-reply that in all 16 institutions have filed complaint against the petitioner on 20.03.2013. On receipt of the complaint, the State Advisory Board, under the Chairmanship of Shri Justice A.S.Aguiar, a retired Judge of High Court, has inquired into the matter and submitted his report under Section 29(4) of the Juveni