Tarannum Praveen v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11946 of 2017 ====================================================== Tarannum Praveen wife of Md. Mofiz Khan, Resident of VillageP.O.- Sitanabad, Pathan Tola, P.S.- Bakhtiyarpur, District- Saharsa. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The Principal Secretary, Human Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Director, Primary Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 4.

The Director, Jan Shiksha cum Joint Secretary, Bihar, Patna. 5.

The District Magistrate, Saharsa.

6.

The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Koshi Division, Saharsa. 7.

The District Education Officer, Saharsa.

8.

The District Programme Officer, Literacy, Saharsa. null null 9.

The Block Development Officer, Simri-Bakhtiyarpur, District- Saharsa. null null 10.

The Block Education Extension Officer, Simri-Bakhtiyarpur, Block- SimriBakhtiyarpur, District- Sah 11.

Farhat Bano, daughter of Fakruddin Alam, Resident of VillageP.O.- Sitanabad, Chowk Tola, P.S.- Bakhtiyarpur, District- Saharsa. ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ratan Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Smt. Shilpa Singh, GA-12 :

Mr. Abhanjali, AC to GA-12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 20-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the Respondent-State.

2. Admittedly, this matter relates to Tola Sewak and Talimi Markez Shiksha Swamsevaks.

3. By a Coordinate Bench decision of this Court dated 02.01.2024 passed in CWJC No. 15189 of 2019, this issue has

Patna High Court CWJC No.11946 of 2017(5) dt.20-11-2025 2/2 been addressed by holding and observing that Talimi Markez Shikshak Swamsevi does not hold Civil Post as well as the same is not a statutory post and, therefore, the writ is not maintainable. Prior to this Coordinate Bench decision, in LPA No. 2185 of 2015, a judgment had already been passed on 02.02.2017 holding and observing that engagement or hiring of Tola Sewak is not a permanent appointment under the State, which is required to be considered under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

4. In view of the aforesaid decisions, the present writ application would not be maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and hence, it is dismissed as not maintainable.

(Alok Kumar Sinha, J) Gaurav Sinha/- U