PARVATI GUDDAPAUR ALIAS TANVASI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYATH RAJ BANGALORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As the questions of facts and law involved in these petitions are similar, they are clubbed, heard together and are being disposed off by this common order. The petitioners are all Anganawadi Workers. The petitioner in W.P. No. 63085/2011 and 63086/2011 are elected as the members of the Taluk Panchayath and the petitioner in W.P. No. 63087/2011 is elected as the member of the Grama. Panchayath. They have called into question the orders issued by the Officers of the Department of Women and Child Development. The impugned orders require the petitioners to put in their resignation either for the post of Anganawadi Workers or for the membership of the local body.

(2.) Sri Rajashekhar Burji, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are doing voluntary service, that they are not holding any civil post and that there are no legal impediments for them to continue as Anganawadi Workers and also as the Members of the local bodies simultaneously. He submits that there is no bar or disqualification under Section 128 of the Panchayath Raj Act for their continuing to hold both the posts. When the statute does not provide for such a restriction, the respondents are not justified in issuing an executive order compelling the petitioners to choose one of the two positions.

(3.) Sri Rajashekhar Burji submits that the petitioners are appointed under a scheme. Therefore their position as Anganawadi Workers is not of permanent nature. He submits that the funds for the functioning of the local body comes from the Central Government. Therefore their working as the Anganawadi Workers under the State Government is not coming in the way of their discharging their duties as the Members of the Taluk Panchayath/Grama Panchayath.