JUDGMENT 1. Heard Mr. Radha Mohan Pandey, the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned AC to SC -16. 2. The petitioners are aggrieved by the communication made to them vide letter dated 17.02.2012 by the District Programme Officer, Bihar Education Project, Kaimur at Bhabhua intimating them that their services as Tola Sevakas has been dispensed with and they have also been asked to refund the money which they had been paid inexcess of their entitlement. 3. The petitioners were engaged as Tola Sevaks for one year on contract basis with the responsibility of accompanying students of lower strata of society for whole of the day so that they do not run away from the school and also of making efforts for upliftment of their living standards. 4. The engagement letter indicates that such engagement was for one year with an honorarium of Rs. Two Thousand per month. After the period of one year is over, such Tola Sevaks could be re-adjusted depending upon their performance. The engagement letter further indicated that because of such experience as Tola Sevak, such persons would not be entitled to stake any claim for Government service. 5. Mr. Pandey, the learned Advocate for the petitioners submits that the only reason for him to agitate their cause is that the scheme of Tola Sevaks has not been done away with. Surprisingly, such Tola Sevaks who were engaged in the year 2008 -09 and 2013-14 have been allowed to continue with their respective engagements and are being paid their honorarium. It is only in the district of Kaimur at Bhabhua that the services of Tola Sevaks who were engaged in the year 2011-12, have been dispensed with. 6. The petitioners have been representing before all authorities, who have written to the Principal Secretary, Department of Education for continuance of the petitioners as Tola Sevaks but to no avail. 7. The counter affidavit merely states that the engagement of the petitioners as Tola Sevaks is for only year and the petitioners cannot, therefore, insist for their continuance of such engagement. This statement could have been accepted provided the entire project would have been abondoned. 7. The counter affidavit merely states that the engagement of the petitioners as Tola Sevaks is for only year and the petitioners cannot, therefore, insist for their continuance of such engagement. This statement could have been accepted provided the entire project would have been abondoned. The State has not controverted the factual position that the Tola Sevaks who were engaged before and after the engagement of the petitioners have been allowed to continue with such engagement and recently Tola Sevaks Rule of 2018 also has been promulgated for the effective functioning of such project. 8. Though, the communication intimating the petitioners about the termination of their engagement was passed in the year 2012 but this petition is being entertained today for the reason that the project has not yet been abandoned and many person who have been engaged as Tola Sevaks in different districts have been allowed to continue. 9. There does not appear to be any rationale behind the picking the Tola Sevaks of one district only who were appointed in one particular financial year, and terminating their engagement. 10. Considering this aspect of the matter, the petitioners are directed to make a detailed representation before the Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Govt. of Bihar within a period four weeks, who on receipt of such representation shall pass a reasoned order within a further period of eight weeks. In case there is no rationale behind disengaging the petitioners when such Tola Sevaks who were appointed in different districts and different financial years have been allowed to continue, necessary sequel action shall be taken as there is nothing on record to indicate any difference between those Tola Sevaks who were engaged later than the petitioners and are still continuing with such engagement. 11. The petition stands disposed of accordingly.