Patna High Court
Ziyaul Haque @ Md. Ziyaul HaqueversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- RITESH KUMAR
Holding
The writ petition is not maintainable as the Talimi Markaz Shikshak Swayam Sevi post is not a statutory civil post and does not confer a legal right to honorarium.
Summary
The petitioner, a Talimi Markaz Shikshak Swayam Sevi appointed on a one‑year contract under a government education scheme, filed a writ petition seeking payment of honorarium from June 2011 onward. The respondents, representing the State of Bihar, argued that the post is not a statutory civil post and therefore does not create a legal right enforceable under Article 226. The Court examined earlier decisions of a coordinate bench in Raj Choudhary v. State of Bihar (C.W.J.C. No.18107 of 2016) and related judgments, which held that contract‑based scheme posts such as Tola Sevak do not give rise to statutory rights and writ petitions concerning them are not maintainable. Relying on those precedents, the Court concluded that the petitioner’s claim for honorarium cannot be entertained through a writ. Consequently, the petition was dismissed for lack of maintainability.
Issues considered
- Whether a contract‑based Talimi Markaz Shikshak Swayam Sevi appointment creates a statutory right to honorarium enforceable under Article 226 of the Constitution.
- Whether the writ petition filed by the petitioner is maintainable in the High Court.
Subjects
- writ petition
- honorarium
- contract appointment
- statutory right
- maintainability
- Article 226
- education scheme
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2655 of 2025
======================================================
Ziyaul Haque @ Md. Ziyaul Haque Son of Abdur Shakur Ansari, Resident of
village- Pirojgarh, Police Station - Ghoghardiha, District - Madhubani.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of
Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Director Primary Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Director Mass Education- Cum-Joint Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
4. The District Magistrate, Madhubani.
5. The District Programme Officer-Cum-District Programme Co-ordinator,
Bihar Education Project, Madhubani.
6. The Block Education Officer, Ghoghardiha, District - Madhubani.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bimal Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Government Pleader (03)
For the BEPC : Mr. Girijesh Kumar, Advocate
: Mr. Akash Anand, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 19-01-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for the
issuance of appropriate writ or direction directing the
respondents to pay honorarium to petitioner (Talimi Markaz)
from June 2011 to till date and thereafter on monthly basis as
per law.
3. At the outset, learned counsel for the respondent-
State points out three different orders passed by a Co-ordinate
Bench of this Hon’ble Court (Annexure-R/1 to Annexure R/3 of
the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent no.5). The
Patna High Court CWJC No.2655 of 2025(2) dt.19-01-2026
2/3
relevant paragraphs of Annexure-R/1 are as follows:-
3. The Talimi Markaz Shikshak Swayam Sevi
is appointed under the scheme on contract
basis for one year, as was done in the case
of Tola Sewak and the post of Talimi
Markaz Shikshak Swayam Sevi is not
statutory and no recruitment rules are
followed for their appointment.
4. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, in the
matter of Tola Sewak, in C.W.J.C. No.
18107 of 2016 (Raj Choudhary v. The
State of Bihar and others), has held as
follows:
“ The learned counsel for the
respondents has raised a preliminary
objection regarding maintainability of the
present writ petition and has referred to a
judgment dated 17.08.2015 passed by a
co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CWJC
No.12390 of 2015 as well as to a
judgment dated 02.02.2017 rendered by
the learned Division Bench of this Court
in L.P.Α. No. 2185 of 2015 whereby and
whereunder it has been held that since the
selection or engagement or hiring of the
Tola Sevak is not a permanent
appointment under the State, which is
required to be considered under Article
226 of the Constitution of India as well as
since the post of Tola Sevak is under a
scheme, the same does not create any
statutory right in favour of the petitioner,
hence writ petitions in such matters as
Patna High Court CWJC No.2655 of 2025(2) dt.19-01-2026
3/3
that of Tola Sevaks are not maintainable.
Having regard to the aforesaid judgments
rendered by a coordinate Bench of this
Court as also by the learned Division
Bench of this Court, this Court is of the
opinion that the present writ petition is not
maintainable, hence the same is
dismissed. However, liberty is granted to
the petitioner to take recourse to such
other remedies as are available under the
law.”
5. The aforesaid order passed by a co-
ordinate Bench of this Court presided over
by Hon'ble Single Judge in the case of Raj
Choudhary (supra) has been affirmed by
a Division Bench of this Court holding
that the said writ petition is not
maintainable.
4. Taking into consideration the aforesaid judgments
of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court and the fact that
the Talimi Markaz Shikshak Swayam Sevi does not hold civil
post and the same is not a statutory post, I am also of the
considered opinion that the present writ petition is not
maintainable and accordingly, the same is dismissed.
(Ritesh Kumar, J)
AjayMishra/-
U
Checking your session…