Patna High Court

Harekrishna KumarversusThe Union of India

Decided: 30 March 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: ANSHUMAN

Holding

Employees of the outsourcing agency cannot challenge the impugned order; the petition is dismissed.

Summary

The petitioners, a group of individuals engaged as Block Resource Persons (BRPs) under the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan scheme, challenged a memo dated 28‑02‑2025 that directed private agencies not to continue employing BRPs after 31‑03‑2025. They argued that their service conditions were governed by government policy and that they had a right to continue employment until the scheme ended or regular appointments were made. The State contended that the petitioners were employees of the outsourcing agencies and that their contracts were terminated in accordance with a clause allowing immediate termination if the project ended. The court observed that the impugned order was addressed to the outsourcing agencies, not directly to the individual petitioners, and that only the agencies could contest it. Consequently, the court held that the petitioners lacked locus standi to challenge the order and dismissed the writ petition, directing them to sue the agencies in the appropriate forum.

Issues considered

Whether individuals employed through an outsourcing agency have locus standi to challenge a government order terminating the agency's contract.
Whether the memo directing cessation of BRP services after 31‑03‑2025 is enforceable against the individual petitioners.
Whether the contractual clause allowing immediate termination upon project cessation bars the petitioners' claim for continued employment.

Subjects

Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan
outsourcing
Block Resource Person
locus standi
government contract
employment law
writ petition

Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7336 of 2025
======================================================
1. Harekrishna Kumar Son of-Ganeshi Singh, Resident of Village- Turki, P.O.-
Bhatauni, P.S.- Simri Bakhtiyarpur, District- Saharsa, Bihar-852127.
2. Shirshank Shubham @ S. Shubham Son of Bijay Kumar Singh, Resident of
Village and PO- Damgarhi, PS- Sourbazar, District- Saharsa, Bihar.
3. Vivek Kumar Son of Kedar Rajak, Village, PO and PS- Beldour, District-
Khagaria, Bihar-852161.
4. Amar Kumar Son of Satyanarayan Yadav, Resident of Village- Sher Basa,
PO and PS- Beldaur, District- Khagaria, Bihar.
5. Amit Kumar Resident of Village and P.O- Pakra, PS- Naugchiya, District-
Bhagalpur, Bihar.
6. Nitesh Kumar Singh Son of Tribhuwan Singh, Resident of Village and P.O-
Hanuman Chowk Santnagar Gangjala, PS- Saharsa, District Saharsa, Bihar.
7. Ugress Kumar Son of Chandeshwari Ram, Resident of Village- Saraswati
Nagar, PO- Ltmadi, PS- Beldaur, District- Khagaria, Bihar.
8. Jugnu Kumar Son of Binod Kumar Sah, Resident of Village- Rohiyar, PO-
Rohiyar, PS- Mansi, Pin-851214, District- Khagaria, Bihar.
9. Amit Kumar Mishra @ Amit Son of Sushil Mishra, Resident of- Near Old
Bank of India Manaitand, PO- Dhanbad, PS- Dhansar, District- Dhanbad,
State- Jharkhand.
10. Deepak Kumar Son of Rambilash Sahu, Resident of Village- Haripur, P.O.-
Haripur, P.S.- Alauli, District- Khagaria, Bihar.
11. Prafull Kumar Son of Ram Prakash Pd. Singh, Resident of Village and P.O-
Haripur, PS- Alauli, District- Khagaria, Bihar.
12. Kishor Kumar Son of Garib Sharma, Resident of- Rajajan, P.O. and P.S.-
Mansi, District- Khagaria, Bihar-851214.
13. Nitesh Kumar Nirala Son of Ramjapo Verma, Resident of Village- Hempur,
PO- Mohanpur, PS- Bakhari, District- Begusarai, Bihar-848201.
14. Sujit Kumar Son of Gauri Shankar Prashad, Resident of Village- Rahimpur
Panchkutti, PO- Rahimpur, PS- Muffasil, District- Khagaria, Bihar.
15. Naresh Nirala Son of Rajesh Yadav, Resident of Village- Maheshpur, PO-
Samda, PS- Sourbazar, District- Saharsa.
16. Babli Kumari D/o- Sunil Chandra Yadav, Village and PO- Mohanpur
Dudhaila, P.S.- Sonbarsa Kachahari, District- Saharsa, Bihar-852202.
17. Riti Kumari W/o Ashish Kumar, Resident of Vilage- Bhoua, PO- Gogri,
District- Khagaria, Bihar.
18. Ashish Kumar Son of Shitlal Yadav, Resident of- Temha, P.O- Banni, P.S.-
Maheshkhunt, District- Khagaria, Bihar.
19. Sanjay Kumar Mukhiya Son of- Balkrishna Mukhiya, Resident of Village
and PO- Govindpur, PS- Pratapgang, District- Supaul, Bihar-852125.

... ... Petitioner/s
Patna High Court CWJC No.7336 of 2025(2) dt.30-03-2026
2/7

Versus

1. The Union of India through Secretary (School Education and Literacy),
Government of India, New Delhi.
2. The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Education
Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Additional Chief Secretary, Education Department, Government of
Bihar, Patna.
4. The Additional Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
5. The Administrative Officer Bihar Education Project Council, Shiksha
Bhawan, Rastra Bhasha Parsishad Campus, Saidpur Rajendra Nagar, Patna.
6. The Director Administration-cum-Additional Secretary, Education
Department, Bihar, Patna.
7. The District Magistrate, Khagaria, District- Khagaria.
8. The District Programme Officer-cum-Primary Education and Sarva Shiksha
Abhiyan, Bihar Education Project Council, Khagaria, District- Khagaria.
9. The District Education Officer, Khagaria, District- Khagaria.
10. The Block Development Officer, Beldaur, District- Khagaria.
11. The Block Development Officer, Alauli, District- Khagaria.
12. The Block Development Officer, Chautham, District- Khagaria.
13. The Block Development Officer, Khagaria, District- Khagaria.
14. The Block Development Officer, Mansi, District- Khagaria.
15. The Block Development Officer, Gogri, District- Khagaria.
16. The Block Development Officer, Parbatta, District- Khagaria.
17. The Block Education Officer, Beldaur, District- Khagaria.
18. The Block Education Officer, Alauli, District- Khagaria.
19. The Block Education Officer, Chautham, District- Khagaria.
20. The Block Education Officer, Khagaria, District- Khagaria.
21. The Block Education Officer, Mansi, District- Khagaria.
22. The Block Education Officer, Gogri, District- Khagaria.
23. The Block Education Officer, Parbatta, District- Khagaria.
24. M/s B.P.AC. India Pvt. Ltd., Office Address at 191, B4, Opposite Road NO.-
5, Jay Prakash Nagar, Patna-800025.
25. M/s. ESEPL Group, Office Address at- Sahdeo Mahto Marg, Boring Canal
Road, Patna.

... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Lakshmi Kumari, Advocate
Patna High Court CWJC No.7336 of 2025(2) dt.30-03-2026
3/7

For the State : Mr. SC-10
For the BEPC : Mr. Girijish Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Akash Anand, Advocate
For the UOI : Mrs. Priya Gupta, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER

2 30-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned

counsel for the State, learned counsel for the Bihar Education

Project Council (hereinafter referred to as ‘BEPC’) and learned

counsel for the Union of India.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for the

following reliefs:-

(i) For setting aside order
Contained in Memo No.-499 dated
28.02.2025 issued by D.E.O., Khagaria
issued to M/S King Security Guard Services
Pvt. Ltd., Patna, M/s B.P.A.C. India Pvt. Ltd,
and M/s E.S.E.P.L. Group of Outsourcing,
whereby the direction has been issued not to
take services of B.R.P.s (Block resource
person) after 31.03.2025.
(ii) For issuance of direction to the
respondent authorities to continue to take
services of the petitioners as Block resource
persons in their respective Blocks even after
31.03.2025 till the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyaan
scheme is in existence and until regular
appointment on the post of BRPs is made.
(iii) For any other relief or reliefs /
Patna High Court CWJC No.7336 of 2025(2) dt.30-03-2026
4/7

interim relief as your honor may deem fit
and proper.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

appointment of the petitioners took place under the Sarva

Shiksha Abhiyan Scheme of the Central Government, under

which major funds are provided by the Central Government for

the purpose of providing basic primary education to children of

all sections of society. Counsel further submits that the

Government of Bihar, under the said scheme, has been acting in

accordance with the Central Government’s guidelines but later

decided to engage private agencies for providing different kinds

of services under the District Project Management Scheme and

Block Project Management Scheme. In this connection, a NIT

bearing No. Professionals/Educations/2023/01, dated

21.06.2023, was issued, by which 18 agencies were empaneled.

4. Counsel further submits that the petitioners are

individuals who were selected by the agencies to provide the

services. Counsel further submits that the petitioners were

selected through the agency, namely, private respondent Nos. 24

& 25 of the present writ petition, but their service conditions are

governed by Government policy. The order impugned is

annexed as Annexure P/8, which is a memo communicated to

the agency vide Memo No. 499, dated 28.02.2025. Counsel
Patna High Court CWJC No.7336 of 2025(2) dt.30-03-2026
5/7

further submits that, on the one hand, the services of the

petitioners have been terminated, but on the other hand, vide

letter dated 03.03.2025 (Annexure P/9), internal correspondence

was made by the Director-cum-Additional Secretary, Education

Department, to all District Education Officers regarding the

consideration and need for engaging the services of the

petitioners and similarly placed persons. Therefore, counsel

submits that notice be issued to private respondent Nos. 24 &

25, and the writ petition of the petitioners be entertained,

directing counter-affidavits from the Bihar Education Project

Council as well as the State Government.

5. Counsel also submits that a writ petition has been

filed by the outsourcing agency before this Court, bearing

CWJC No. 4323 of 2025, which is pending for adjudication.

6. Learned counsel for the State submits that the

counter-affidavit has already been filed. In the counter-affidavit,

the stand taken by the State is that the petitioners were engaged

through an outsourcing agency and were not directly appointed

by the State. When the authority concerned decided not to

continue work with the said agency, their contracts were

consequently terminated.

7. Learned counsel for the Administrative Officer,
Patna High Court CWJC No.7336 of 2025(2) dt.30-03-2026
6/7

Bihar Education Project Council (respondent No. 5), submits

that the issue involved in the present writ petition has already

been decided by this Court vide Judgment dated 25.03.2025 in

CWJC No. 4556 of 2025. Counsel further submits that, since the

petitioner was an employee of the outsourcing agency and not of

the State, the contract contains a specific condition that if the

project is terminated due to unavoidable circumstances, the

contract will come to an end with immediate effect.

8. In light of the submissions made above, it

transpires to this Court that the petitioners were appointed for

the completion of various schemes under the Sarva Shiksha

Abhiyan. It has been decided that, after 31.03.2025, services

from the outsourcing agency shall not be continued. It is only

due to this reason that the petitioners have become aggrieved.

9. It also transpires to this Court, from the record, that

the impugned letter has been issued to the outsourcing agency

and not to the petitioners. The outsourcing agency may have the

right to challenge the same, but not the petitioners. Therefore,

this Court is of the firm view that employees of the outsourcing

agency shall not challenge the impugned order.

10. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands

disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioners to sue against the
Patna High Court CWJC No.7336 of 2025(2) dt.30-03-2026
7/7

outsourcing agency before appropriate forum.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.)

Aman Kumar/-

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…