912 WP3527.2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3527 OF 2025 1. ARUNA RAMCHANDRA VALVI, Age: 36 Years, Occu.: Service as Block Community Mobilizer, R/o.: Hatdhui, Khuntamodi, Nandurbar, District: Nandurbar .. Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, Through its Secretary, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32 2. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, Zilla Parishad, Nandurbar 3. THE TALUKA HEALTH OFFICER, Taluka Dhadgaon, District: Nandurbar .. Respondents ... Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Dipesh D. Pande AGP for Respondent No.1: Mr. R. K. Ingole Advocate for Respondents No.2&3 : Mr. Rakesh Nemichandji Jain ... CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI & SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, JJ. Date : 17.06.2026 PER COURT :- 1. The present Petitioner challenges her relieving order dated 04.02.2025 and the recovery of Rs.45,315/- issued by Respondent No.2 in this Petition. 2026:BHC-AUG:23888-DB 912 WP3527.2025 -2- 2. Heard Mr. Dipesh D. Pande, learned Advocate for the Petitioner, Mr. R. K. Ingole, learned AGP for Respondent No.1 and Mr. Rakesh Nemichandji Jain, learned Advocate for Respondents No.2 and 3. 3. The learned Advocate for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner was initially selected as ASHA Worker under the National Health Mission in the year 2007 till 2013. Thereafter, she was selected as a Block Facilitator in the year 2014. Finally, she was selected as Block Community Mobilizer in the year 2019 till 04.02.2025. According to the Petitioner, she was doing her official duty with dedication and as expected. The husband of the Petitioner was the Sarpanch of the village and due to political rivalry some bogus complaints were filed against her. A committee came to be appointed to make an inquiry against her. The Petitioner has cooperated with the committee however she was not allowed to put-forth her explanation. The Inquiry Committee has submitted it’s report on 12.09.2024. Respondent No.2 under the pressure from Union of the Block Facilitator and ASHA workers namely AITUK and the agitation under letter dated 08.01.2025 without issuing show cause notice to the Petitioner has directly called her for hearing vide letter dated 912 WP3527.2025 -3- 21.01.2025. The date of hearing was fixed on 27.01.2025. The Petitioner was not aware of the complaint against her. As no show cause notice was issued she could not place relevant documents on record and was required to orally explain the nature of her job. She had denied the alleged misappropriation allegation. No record in respect of alleged misappropriation was shown to her. Respondent No.2 had then passed the order of relieving the Petitioner vide communication dated 04.02.2025 and directed the recovery of an amount of Rs.45,315/-. Thereafter also the Petitioner on 07.02.2025 had made application to Respondent No.2 and requested that she be allowed to place her explanation and to led evidence. However, it was not considered. Therefore, she is constrained approach this court. 4. The learned Advocate for Respondents No.2 and 3 relies on the affidavit-in-reply of Dr. Ravindra B. Sonawane, the employee in Respondent No.2. He submits that the Petitioner was initially appointed as ASHA Worker in the year 2007 and then at the time of relieving her she was serving as the Block Community Mobilizer. On the receipt of complaint against the Petitioner, on 15.12.2023, Inquiry Committee was constituted. After the thorough inquiry the report came to be submitted on 12.09.2024. 912 WP3527.2025 -4- It has been held by the committee that the allegations of misappropriation have been proved. In fact, the Petitioner vide notices dated 27.09.2024, 07.10.2024 and 21.10.2024 was called upon to produce any such documents to refute allegations. There is a specific mention of submission of report and visit of the inquiry committee, wherein the financial inconsistencies have been revealed. The vouchers, bills in respect of payment of the ASHA Workers were not submitted and, therefore, she was called upon to submit these documents. There was no response from the Petitioner. It was held by the committee that the amounts of ASHA Workers were not paid regularly, the information regarding account and Aadhar numbers of ASHA Workers were not filled properly and whenever ASHA Workers used to ask about the remuneration the Petitioner used to gave a vague answer. Therefore, taking into consideration her conduct, she was relieved from her post. 5. The facts which are not in dispute are that under a scheme the Petitioner was appointed initially as ASHA Worker. Thereafter, as a Block Facilitator and then as Block Community Mobilizer. The appointment orders are on record and it can be seen that her appointment was on temporary basis. The 912 WP3527.2025 -5- communication dated 08.01.2015 by Commissioner (Family Welfare) under the National Health Mission, Maharashtra to all the Chief Executive Officers of the Zilla Parishads specifically carved out the duties of various posts including the post of Block Community Mobilizer. Upon receipt of the complaint, a committee of 4 members was appointed under the orders dated 15.12.2023 by the District Health Officer, Zilla Parishad, Nandurbar. It appears that the committee worked for about 2 years and had not submitted any report and, therefore, the Union of ASHA workers had made a complaint. But prior to that the report was submitted by the committee to the District Health Officer on 12.09.2024, wherein the irregularities in the financial transactions were noted so also the grievances were considered. 6. The learned Advocate for the Petitioner has vehemently submitted that opportunity of refuting the allegations was never given and, therefore, the Petitioner could not give evidence in support of her defence. However, it is to be noted from her own communication dated 07.02.2025 that it was after she was relieved she accepted that certain amount has been transferred in her account. In this respect, it is stated by the Petitioner that the said amount has been then repaid by her. 912 WP3527.2025 -6- There is another communication that is filed by the Petitioner herself on record given by her on 14.01.2025, wherein she has stated that amount of Rs.29,325/- and 15,140/- owed by one Sunita Vasave was come to her account and then on the said communication itself said Sunita Vasave has stated that she has received the amount of Rs.45,465/-. If we consider these amounts they are from July 2024 to September 2024 and then November 2023 and March 2024. Thus, the Petitioner admits that these amounts were towards the payment of said Sunita Vasave. Only after the inquiry committee was constituted the Petitioner has returned the amount. There was no minimum action on her part, if at all it was mistake on the part of the office; to bring it to the notice of the office that such an amount has been wrongly credited to her account. 7. Along with affidavit-in-reply Respondents No.2 and 3 has given copy of the 3 notices issued on 27.09.2024, 07.10.2024 and 21.10.2024 giving an opportunity to the Petitioner to place on record the documents in respect of the vouchers, bills etc. regarding the financial irregularities noted by the Inquiry Committee. Therefore, when the Petitioner is a temporary employee and there is sufficient evidence on record to show that 912 WP3527.2025 -7- an opportunity of hearing was given then only the relieving letter has been issued, we do not find any merit in the present Petition. This is not a fit case, where we should exercise our powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Writ Petition stands dismissed. (SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.) (SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.) marathe