Patna High Court
Md. IrshadversusThe State Of Bihar and Ors
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- ALOK KUMAR SINHA
Holding
Appointments of Shiksha Swayam Sevak/Tola Sevak are not civil posts and writ jurisdiction under Article 226 does not extend to them, so the petition is dismissed.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Irshad, a Shiksha Swayam Sevak (Tola Sevak) at Utkarmit Middle School, was terminated by an order of the Tola Samiti dated 21-12-2015. He filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking quash of the termination order and reinstatement. The respondents, the State of Bihar and related officials, contended that the position of Shiksha Swayam Sevak/Tola Sevak is not a civil post and therefore not amenable to judicial review under Article 226. The Court relied on earlier decisions holding that appointments of Tola Sevaks are not permanent civil appointments and are outside the scope of writ jurisdiction. Consequently, the Court held that the writ petition was not maintainable and dismissed it, while allowing the petitioner to approach the appropriate administrative forum for relief.
Issues considered
- Whether a Shiksha Swayam Sevak/Tola Sevak is a civil post within the ambit of Article 226 writ jurisdiction.
- Whether the termination order of a Tola Sevak can be challenged by a writ petition.
- Whether the petitioner has locus standi to file the writ petition.
Subjects
- Article 226
- writ jurisdiction
- Shiksha Swayam Sevak
- Tola Sevak
- civil service appointment
- termination order
- locus standi
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16892 of 2017
======================================================
Md. Irshad Son of Md. Mansur Alam @ Md. Mansur Resident of Village-
Gumti Tola, P.S. Block- Kursela, District- Katihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Education ,Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Director, Jan Shiksha-cum-Joint Secretary, Department of Education
Govt. of Bihar,Patna.
4. The Collector-cum-District- Magistrate, Katihar,District- Katihar.
5. The District Programme OfficerLiteracy, District- Katihar.
6. The Block Education Extension Officer, Block- Kursela District- Katihar.
7. The Block Programme Officer-Cum-Cordinator, Block Kursela, District-
Katihar.
8. The Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj Zarlahi, P.S. Block- Kursela, District-
Katihar.
9. The Head Master , Utkarmit Middle School, Gumti Tola, Block- Kursela,
District- Katihar.
10. Shah Alam Son of Md. Khairullah Vill- Gumti tola, P.S. Block-
Kursela,District- Katihar.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Md. Qumrul Hoda, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr.S.C.Mishra -SC-16
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
8 22-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel appearing for the respondents-State.
2. The petitioner in the present writ application has
prayed for the grant of following reliefs:
“For quashing the order dated
21.12.2015 passed by the Tola Samitti
(appointment committee) of Utkermit Middle
School, Gumti Tola, Block-Kursela, District-
Katihar whereby and whereunder the
appointment of petitioner has been
Patna High Court CWJC No.16892 of 2017(8) dt.22-01-2026
2/3
terminated from the post of Shiksha Soyam
Sevak and further for a direction to the
concerned Respondents to appoint the
petitioner on the said Post of Shiksha Yoyam
Sevak in the said Middle School of Gumti
Tola, Block-Kursela, Katihar and for other
necessary directions in the circumstances set
forth below.”
3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents-
State objects to the maintainability of the present writ
application contending that the petitioner was a Shiksha
Swayam Sevi /Tola Sewak, which is apparent from Annexure-F
to the counter affidavit filed by respondents-State. He submits
that the status of Shiksha Swayam Sevi and Tola Sewak are
similar to each other and since it has already been held by
various decisions of this Court that Tola Sewak do not hold a
civil post and therefore, no writ is maintainable at their behest
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, similarly no writ
at the behest of Shiksha Swayam Sevi would also be
maintainable in law.
4. In the case of Ram Lakhan Ram vs. The State of
Bihar & Ors., Division Bench of this Court judgment vide order
dated 02.02.2017 passed in LPA No.2185 of 2015 has already
held that mattesr relating to selection or engagement or hiring of
the Tola Sewak is not any permanent appointment under the
State, which is required to be considered under Article 226 of
Patna High Court CWJC No.16892 of 2017(8) dt.22-01-2026
3/3
the Constitution of India.
5. Further, the same position has been reiterated in
order dated 01.03.2021 passed in LPA No.630 of 2019 and
thereafter in various decision of coordinate of this Court such as
order dated 20.01.2026 passed in CWJC No.21555 of 2018,
order dated 19.11.2025 passed in CWJC No.22280 of 2014, the
same position in law has been reiterated.
6. In view of the fact that no writ is maintainable at
the instance of Tola Sewak and the status of Shiksha Swayam
Sevi is akin to Tola Sewak, therefore, this writ application is not
maintainable in law, accordingly it is dismissed.
7. Petitioner is granted liberty to approach the
appropriate forum/authority, which may be available to him in
accordance with law for redressal of his grievances.
(Alok Kumar Sinha, J)
Prakash Narayan
U
Checking your session…