1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 3453 of 2009 ( Smt. Durga Hanumanta Khadse ..vs.. State of Maharashtra and others ) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. J.A. Anthony, Advocate for the petitioner, Mrs. Dangre, Addl. Govt. Pleader for the respondents 1 to 3. CORAM:- S.A.BOBDE AND SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, JJ. DATED :- 08-01-2010 1. The petitioner has challenged the orders dated 28-5-2009 and 18-7-2009 cancelling and revoking her appointment as an Helper. It appears that after the petitioner appointed as an Helper, her services has been terminated on the ground that the petitioner is not resident of that locality where Anganwadi is situated. 2. Mr. Anthony, the leaned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the clause does not require actual residence of the candidates in the Anganwadi itself. That may be correct, but it appears that as per the Resolution dated 12-3-2008 the requirement is that Helper should be a resident of the village, or locality, or the slum (Zopadpatti). In fact this requirement is mandatory as per Clause 6 of the Government Resolution dated 2 12-3-2008. In fact while appointing the candidates, it was made clear that if any information is found incorrect or false will render the person liable for action. 3. We find that the respondents have given adequate notice to the petitioner to show cause as to why her appointment should not be cancelled since she is not residing in the locality. In this case, the locality is Annasaheb Sathe Nagar. Hence, there is no reason to interfere. Petition is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE adgokar