1. This writ petition has been filed by petitioner challenging the order dated 4.7.2015 whereby the petitioner's services as Aaganwadi Worker have been terminated.

2. In brief the case of petitioner is that she was appointed as Aaganwadi Worker at village Kheda Pindoniya vide order dated 28.4.2007 since then she is discharging her duty diligently but abruptly by the impugned order dated 4.7.2015 her services have been terminated.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the impugned order has been passed in violation to the principle of natural justice and without following the procedure which has been prescribed in the applicable circular.

4. Counsel for State has supported the impugned order.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for parties and perused the record.

6. The detailed procedure in respect of appointment and termination has been prescribed in the circular dated 10.7.2007. Clause D of the circular provides the procedure for removing an Aaganwadi Worker and reads as under:-

^^n- vkaxuokM+h dk;ZdrkZ@lgkf;dk dks in ls gVkus dh izfdz;k %&

1- ;fn vkaxuokM+h dk;ZdrkZ@lgkf;dk }kjk vkaxuokM+h dsUnz dk lapkyu fu;ekuqlkj ugha fd;k tkrk gS vFkok muds }kjk vius drZO;ksa ,oa nkf;Roksa ds fuoZgu esa ykijokgh dh tkrh gS rks ifj;kstuk vf/kdkjh@efgyk ,oa cky fodkl ds vU; mPp vf/kdkjh }kjk vkaxuokM+h dk;ZdrkZ@lgkf;dk dks lquokbZ dk volj nsrs gq, tk¡p esa nks"kh ik, tkus ij in ls i`Fkd fd;k tk ldsxkA

2- ;fn lg;ksfxuh ekr` lfefr fdlh dk;ZdrkZ@lgkf;dk ds dk;Z ls larq"V ugh gS rks i`Fkd~ lg;ksfxuh ekr` lfefr bl vk'k; dk izLrko mi;qDr dkj.k n'kkZrs gq, cSBd esa izLrqr djsxh ,oa cSBd esa izLrko cgqer ls ikfjr gksus ij i;Zos{kd dks izsf"kr djsxhA i;Zos{kd Lo;a lacaf/kr lfefr }kjk izkIr izLrko ds ifjizs{; esa gVkus ds dkj.kksa ds rF;ksa dh tk¡p djsxhA mlds i'pkr~ viuk tkap izfrosnu 15 fnol esa Li"V vuq'kalk lfgr cky fodkl ifj;kstuk vfèkdkjh dks Hkstuk gksxkA ifj;kstuk vf/kdkjh }kjk i;Zos{kd ds tk¡p izfrosnu dk ijh{k.k djus ,oa mi;qDr dkj.k ik, tkus ij lkr fnol esa vk¡xuokM+h dk;ZdrkZ@lgkf;dk dh lsok lekfIr dk fu.kZ; ysdj lsok&lekfIr dk vkns'k tkjh fd;k tk,xkA vkaxuokM+h dk;ZdrkZ@lgkf;dk dks in ls i`Fkd~ djus ds iwoZ lquokbZ dk volj fn;k tkuk vfuok;Z gksxk ;fn lg;ksfxuh ekr` lfefr o i;Zos{kd ds er esa fHkUurk gks rks cky fodkl ifj;kstuk vf/kdkjh }kjk tk¡p mijkar fu.kZ; fy;k tkdj ftyk dk;ZØe vf/kdkjh@ftyk efgyk cky fodkl vf/kdkjh ds vuqeksnu i'pkr~ in ls i`Fkd~ fd;k tk ldsxkA

3- ;fn i;Zos{kd dh tkudkjh esa dk;ZdrkZ@lgkf;dk ds fo#) dksbZ xaHkhj f'kdk;r lh/ks vkrh gS rks] og bu f'kdk;rksa ij tk¡p mijkar viuk tk¡p izfrosnu 15 fnol esa Li"V vuq'kalk lfgr cky fodkl ifj;kstuk vf/kdkjh dks Hkstuk gksxkA ifj;kstuk vf/kdkjh }kjk i;Zos{kd ds tkap izfrosnu dk ijh{k.k djus ,oa mi;qDr dkj.k ik, tkus ij lkr fnol esa vkaxuokM+h dk;ZdrkZ@lgkf;dk dh lsok lekfIr dk fu.kZ; ysdj lsok lekfIr ds vkns'k tkjh fd;k tk,xkA vkaxuokM+h dk;ZdrkZ@lgkf;dk dks in ls i`Fkd djus ds iwoZ lquokbZ dk volj fn;k tkuk vfuok;Z gksxkA**

7. The aforesaid circular in clear terms provides that services of Aaganwadi Worker can be terminated after giving an opportunity of hearing and finding guilty in enquiry.

8. The Division bench of this Court in the matter of Meera Koli v. State of M.P. and others, reported in 2008(2) MPLJ 76 considering the earlier circular has held that before terminating the services of Aaganwadi Worker, the opportunity of hearing as well as the enquiry is necessary. The Coordinate Bench of this court also in the matter of Smt. Kansa v. State of M.P. and others, in Writ Petition No.2258/2015 considering the circular dated 10.7.2007 has held that an enquiry with participation of the concerned Aaganwadi Worker is necessary.

9. In the present case no summary enquiry of any nature whatsoever has been conducted while terminating the services of petitioner.

10. Counsel for respondents has also raised an objection about availability of alternate remedy of appeal but in a case where the respondents have not complied with the procedure prescribed and have not followed the