Patna High Court
Tuntun MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- ALOK KUMAR SINHA
Holding
A writ petition filed on behalf of a Tola Swayam Sewak is not maintainable under Article 226 and must be dismissed.
Summary
The petitioner, a Tola Swayam Sewak appointed on 22 October 2008, sought a writ directing the State of Bihar to pay his salary from 11 March 2012 to October 2018 and to allow him to continue in the post, claiming no termination letter had been issued. The respondents contended that the writ was not maintainable because a Tola Swayam Sewak is not a permanent appointment and therefore cannot invoke Article 226. The court relied on earlier decisions of the Patna High Court (L.P.A. No. 2185 of 2015, L.P.A. No. 630 of 2019, C.W.J.C. No. 22280 of 2014, and C.W.J.C. No. 21555 of 2018) which held that writ applications on behalf of Tola Sewaks are not maintainable. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition as not maintainable. The petitioner was directed to seek his remedy before the appropriate forum or authority as per law.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition under Article 226 is maintainable when filed by a Tola Swayam Sewak, who is not a permanent appointment of the State.
Subjects
- Article 226
- writ jurisdiction
- Tola Swayam Sewak
- non‑permanent appointment
- maintainability
- salary claim
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.892 of 2026
======================================================
Tuntun Mahto Son of Late Mahadev Mahto, Resident of village- Gangsara,
Ward No.- 09, P.S.- Sarairanjan, District - Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through its Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Addl. Chief Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
3. The Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Director Mass Education cum Joint Secretary, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
5. The District Magistrate, Samastipur.
6. The District Education Officer, Samastipur.
7. The District Program Officer (Establishment), Samastipur.
8. The District Program Officer, (Literacy), Samastipur.
9. The Block Education Officer, Sarairanjan, Samastipur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ganesh Prasad Singh
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, A.C. to Government Pleader
(20)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
2 22-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the respondent-State.
2. The petitioner in the present writ application has
prayed for grant of following relief :-
(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ
commanding the respondents to pay the salary to
the petitioner after calculating from 11.03.2012 to
till the month of October, 2018 he was worked.
(ii) For issuance of an appropriate writ
commanding the respondents to allow to the
petitioner to work on the post of Tola Swayam
Patna High Court CWJC No.892 of 2026(2) dt.22-01-2026
2/3
Sewak because no termination letter has been
issued to the petitioner and till date the said post is
still vacant in Government Middle School,
Gangsara, Sarairanja upon which petitioner was
appointed on 22.10.2008 and payment of salary
was made to the peittioenr only till 11.02.2012.”
3. At the very outset learned counsel appearing for the
respondent State submits that this writ application is not
maintainable as the same have been preferred at the behest of
Tola Swayam Sewak.
4. By order dated 02.02.2017 passed in L.P.A. No.
2185 of 2015, Division Bench of this Court has already held that
Tola Sewak is not a permanent appointment of the State and,
therefore, matter relating to them cannot be considered under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
5. In another order dated 01.03.2021 passed in L.P.A.
No.630 of 2019, similar stand has been taken by the Division
Bench of this Court. By order dated 19.11.2025 passed in
C.W.J.C. No.22280 of 2014 and order dated 20.01.2026 passed
in C.W.J.C. No.21555 of 2018 also above position in law with
regard to Tola Sewak has been reiterated.
6. In view of the settled position in law that writ
application at the behest of Tola Sewak is not maintainable, I am
not inclined to entertain this writ application and hence it is
accordingly dismissed as not maintainable.
Patna High Court CWJC No.892 of 2026(2) dt.22-01-2026
3/3
7. The petitioner would be at liberty to seek his
remedy before appropriate forum/authority in accordance with
law.
(Alok Kumar Sinha, J)
sanjeev/-
U
Checking your session…