Dismissed¶25

Md. Yahiya v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC17 Sept 2024CWJC/14002/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Talimi Markaz; Shikshak Swayam Sevi; Tola Sewak; writ application maintainability; contractual appointment under scheme; non-statutory post; no recruitment rules; does not hold civil post; Article 226 of the Constitution; Raj Choudhary v. The State of Bihar and others, C.W.J.C. No. 18107 of 2016; CWJC No. 12390 of 2015 (judgment dated 17.08.2015); L.P.A. No. 2185 of 2015 (judgment dated 02.02.2017); Patna High Court; Anil Kumar Sinha, J.; writ dismissed with liberty to pursue other remedies; Lakhisarai; State of Bihar.

What did the court decide?

Liberty given to the petitioner to take recourse to such other remedy as is available under the law. ¶25

Md. Yahiya Vs The State of Bihar — Writ and Judicial Review | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14002 of 2024

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Md. Yahiya Son of Md. Gulam Mustafa Resident of Village- Nandnama, P.S.Ramgarh Chouk, Distt.- Lakhisarai.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar.

¶7

The Distt. Magistrate, Lakhisarai.

¶8

The Distt. Programme Officer, Lakhisarai.

¶9

The Public Authority cum Distt. Education Officer, Lakhisarai.

¶10

... ... Respondent/s

¶11

====================================================== Appearance :

¶12

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Mukesh Kumar No1 For the Respondent/s : Mr. Gyan Pakash Ojha, GA 7 ======================================================

¶13

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶14

2 17-09-2024 Heard learned Counsel for the parties concerned.

¶15

2. The petitioner has filed the present writ application for his appointment on the post of Talimi Markaj.

¶16

3. The Talimi Markaz, Shikshak Swayam Sevi, is appointed under the scheme on contract basis, 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.

¶17

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:

¶18

“The learned counsel for the respondents has raised a preliminary objection

¶19

Patna High Court CWJC No.14002 of 2024(2) dt.17-09-2024 2/3

¶20

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 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.”

¶21

5. The aforesaid order passed by a co-ordinate Bench

¶22

of this Court presided over by Hon'ble Single Judge in C.W.J.C. no. 12390 of 2015 has been affirmed by a Division Bench of this Court holding that the said writ petition is not maintainable.

¶23

Patna High Court CWJC No.14002 of 2024(2) dt.17-09-2024 3/3

¶24

6. Taking into consideration the aforesaid judgment of a co-ordinate Bench of this Court and the fact that Talimi Markaz, Shikshak Swayam Sevi, does not hold civil post as well as the same is not a statutory post, I also come to the conclusion that the present writ application is not maintainable.

¶25

7. This writ application is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶26

8. However, the petitioner is given liberty to take recourse to such other remedy as is available under the law.

¶27

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.)

¶28

Prabhakar Anand/-

¶29

U √

Md. Yahiya v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Yahiya v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shila Devi Vs Subashni Devi

Usha Devi Vs the State of Bihar

Md. Md. Rozid @ Md. Rozid Alam @ Rozid Vs The State of Bihar

Ashok Kumar Chaudhary Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Tabbu Khatoon Vs The State of Bihar

Pramod Kumar Jha Vs The State of Bihar