1 W.P.No.6019/11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.6019 OF 2011. Sumanbai W/o Dayanand Bankar, Age 48 years, Occ.Anganwadi Helper, R/o Rithi - Moharda, Tq. Kannad, Dist.Aurangabad. ... Petitioner. Versus 1. The Collector, Collector Office, Aurangabad. 2. Ratan Somaji Dabhade, Age 65 years,Occ.Labour, R/o Ritthi (Moharda), Tq.Kannad, Dist.Aurangabad. ... Respondents. ... Mr.Pahune Patil Nandkishor J., advocate for the petitioner. Mr.S.B.Pulkundwar, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for Respondent No.1. Mr.H.V.Patil, advocate for Respondent No.2. ... CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J. Date : 23.09.2011. 2 W.P.No.6019/11 ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Heard. 2. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties, the petition is taken up for final hearing. 3. The petitioner is working as Anganwadi Helper since 1994. In the elections held in September 2007, the petitioner was elected as a Member of Grampanchayat and thereafter as a Sarpanch. 4. The Government issued a notification dated 5.8.2010, stating that the Anganwadi Helper, if elected as members of local bodies should resign from the post of Anganwadi worker/Helper and if they do not resign then they shall be terminated. The present Respondent No.2 filed a complaint before the Collector to disqualify the petitioner as a Member of Grampanchayat on the ground that petitioner is working as Anganwadi Helper. The Collector, dismissed the complaint. The appeal was filed 3 W.P.No.6019/11 before the Commissioner. The Commissioner allowed the appeal and disqualified the petitioner as a Member of the Grampanchayat. The said order is assailed in the present Writ Petition. 5. The issue that the said Government Resolution/Notification dated 5.8.2010, does not operate retrospectively and operates only prospectively is no longer res-integra in view of the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court at Nagpur in W.P.No.4155/2010 with companion Writ Petitions dated 7.2.2010. The Division Bench has specifically held that the said G.R. operates prospectively and the Members elected prior to the said G.R. would not be affected. 6. In light of the same, the impugned order deserves to be quashed and set aside. 7. Rule is accordingly made absolute in terms of prayer clause (B). (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) asp/office/wp601911 4 W.P.No.6019/11