( 1. ) THE petitioner in the instant writ petition has impugned the legality and validity of the order (Annexure P-15) dated 27-1-2004 by which her services have been terminated from the post of Samvida Shala Shikshak and the consequential order dated 29-1-2004 (Annexure P-16) as well as the Circular (Annexure P-12), dated 27-5-1996.

( 2. ) FACTS leading to the filing of the present petition, briefly stated, are that petitioner submitted an application dated 28-9-1998 (Annexure P-1) for appointment on the post of 'Aanganwadi' worker in Mahidpur, District Ujjain. Clause (3) of the Advertisement reads as under :-

"Any Government Servant or any person elected or nominated in Panchayats or local bodies or their relatives shall not be appointed as 'Aanganwadi' worker."

Subsequently, by a notice dated 6-10-1998 Municipal Council, Mahidpur, District Ujjain, invited applications for appointment on the post of 'Aanganwadi' workers in 11 Aanganwadi' centres situated within the limits of Municipal Council, Mahidpur. On the recommendation of Municipal Council, Mahidpur, petitioner was appointed by an order dated 2-1-1999 (Annexure P-3) as 'Aanganwadi' worker in the centre situate in Ward No. 1, Municipal Council, Mahidpur.

Thereafter, an advertisement (Annexure P-6), dated 17-7-2001 was issued by Janpad Panchayat, Mahidpur inviting applications for appointment on the post of Samvida Shala Shikshak. In response to the aforesaid advertisement, the petitioner submitted an application (Annexure P-7) on 23-7-2001. The petitioner was selected and an order of appointment dated 26-9-2001 (Annexure P-8) was issued. The petitioner was posted in Government Middle School, Dhulet, Tehsil Mahidpur, District Ujjain. Thereafter the petitioner was served with a show-cause notice dated 18-8-2003 (Annexure P-10) by which petitioner was asked to show cause as to why her services should not be dispensed with, on the ground that petitioner was found ineligible for appointment as 'Aanganwadi' worker in view of instructions dated 27-5-1996 issued by the State Government the husband of the petitioner was already in Government service. The petitioner submitted reply to aforesaid show-cause notice. Thereafter by an order dated 27-1-2004 (Annexure P-15), services of petitioner were dispensed with. A consequential order dated 29-1-2004 (Annexure P-16) was also passed.

( 3. ) THE respondents have filed return, inter alia, contending that against the impugned order dated 27-1-2004 (Annexure P-15), remedy of appeal is provided under the Rules framed under the provisions of Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993. It has further been averred that petitioner was ineligible for appointment on the post of 'Aanganwadi' worker as her husband was employed as an Assistant Teacher. THE petitioner by suppressing the aforesaid material facts secured appointment on the post of 'Aanganwadi' worker and also took advantage of her experience on the post of 'Aanganwadi' worker at the time of her selection on the post 'Samvida Shala Shikshak. THE executive instructions dated 27-5-1996 (Annexure P-12) have been issued by the State Government in consonance with the instructions issued by the Department of Women and Child Development, Ministry of Human Resources Development, Government of India regarding Integrated Child Development Service Programme. THE Executive Instructions contained in Annexure P-12 have no force of law. THE impugned order of termination of services of the petitioner, is in accordance with law and has been passed after following the principles of natural justice. THE petitioner having accepted the terms and conditions enumerated in the Executive instructions contained in Annexure P-12, dated 27-5-1996 cannot now challenge or assail the same. At this belated stage she cannot now be allowed to take a somersault and challenge the conditions incorporated in the Executive instructions (Annexure P-12).

( 4. ) WE have heard learned Counsel for the part