JUDGMENT Hon’ble V.K. Shukla J.—Petitioner had been performing and discharging duties as Chainman. Petitioner has contended that he was entitled for relaxation in age for the purposes of promotion on the post of Lekhpal. Matter qua the petitioner has been referred to the Board of Revenue U.P. at Lucknow on 9.2.2004 by District Magistrate, Muzaffar Nagar. As no decision was being taken on the said reference which has been made, in this background Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 50905 of 2006 (Yudhisthir v. State of U.P. and others) was preferred before the Court and the Court on 14.9.2006 asked the Board of Revenue, U.P. at Lucknow to take decision in the matter. Thereafter on 28.11.2006 decision has been taken rejecting the claim of the petitioner on the ground that petitioner has passed his Prathama Examination form Hindi Sahitya Sammellan, Prayag, which is unrecognized as per Government Order dated 27.4.1993 as such petitioner is not entitled for being promoted. At this juncture present writ petition has been filed. 2. Sri Pankaj Kumar Srivastava, learned Counsel for the petitioner contended with the vehemence that petitioner has been metted with arbitrary treatment and in all eventuality his claim is liable to be considered for promotion treating him as eligible, as Rakesh Kumar and Shafique Ahmad, who have also passed their Prathama Examination for Hindi Sahitya Sammellan, Prayag, have been accorded promotion on the post of Lekhpal, as such writ petition deserves to be allowed. 3. Sri P.K. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel on the other hand contended that from the own showing of the petitioner, his certificate which has been possessed, is unrecognized certificate and same is nothing more than waste paper and further merely because two incumbents have been accorded promotion claim of the petitioner will not improve as Article 14 ensures positive equality and not negative equality, as such writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. After respective arguments have been advanced, factual position which is emerging is to the effect that petitioner does not fulfil the requisite qualification which has been prescribed for being promoted as Lekhpal. Petitioner has to his credit certificate of Prathama issued from Hindi Sahitya Sammellan, Prayag. Vide Government Order dated 27.4.1993 any certificate, degree or Diploma issued from Hindi Sahitya Sammellan, has been declared to be unrecognized Degree, Diploma and Certificate. Petitioner has to his credit certificate of Prathama issued from Hindi Sahitya Sammellan, Prayag. Vide Government Order dated 27.4.1993 any certificate, degree or Diploma issued from Hindi Sahitya Sammellan, has been declared to be unrecognized Degree, Diploma and Certificate. Once aforesaid Degree, Diploma and Certificate has been held to be unrecognized then by no stretch of imagination said certificate could be accepted to be recognized certificate for the purposes of according promotion. Petitioner has not at all contended that apart from said certificate of Prathama issued from Hindi Sahitya Sammellan, Prayag, petitioner possesses any other Certificate which is recognized by the State Government making petitioner eligible for promotion. Unrecognized certificates qua the authorities concerned is as good as waste paper. Here petitioner does not fulfil eligibility criteria as provided for under Lekhpal Service Rules, as such this Court cannot compel the authority concerned to treat the petitioner as eligible. The view which has been expressed by the Commissioner and Secretary, Board of Revenue on this score cannot be said to be suffering from any infirmity. 5. Phtrity has been sought to be drawn qua Rekesh Kumar and Shafique Ahmad. It is well settled that two wrongs do not make a thing right. Merely because Rakesh Kumar and Shafique Ahmad have been accorded promotion on the post of Lekhpal on the strength of certificate of Prathma from Hindi Sahitya Sammellan, Prayag, it is not necessary that petitioner shall also be accorded promotion. Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India v. International Trading Company, 2003 (5) SCC 437 , took the view that a party cannot claim that since something wrong has been done in other case, direction should be issued for doing another wrong. It would not be setting wrong right, but would be perpetuating another wrong. In such matters no discrimination is involved. The concept of equal treatment on the logic of Article 14 cannot be pressed into service in such cases. Said view has been reiterated by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of U.P. State Sugar Corporation Ltd. v. Sant Raj Singh, AIR SCW 3013, by mentioning that Article 14 has positive concept and nobody can claim equality in illegality. Thus, Article 14 ensures equality in positive and equality qua illegality cannot be subscribed in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Thus, Article 14 ensures equality in positive and equality qua illegality cannot be subscribed in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Consequently even if any ineligible person has been accorded promotion on the post of Lekhpal, petitioner cannot be accorded promotion qua the same and decision which has been taken qua the petitioner there is no infirmity in the same. 6. However District Magistrate, Muzaffar Nagar, respondent No. 3 is directed to see as to whether Rakesh Kumar and Shafique Ahmad have been rightly accorded promotion or not. In this regard District Magistrate, Muzaffar Nagar shall make inquiry, as to whether they fulfilled requisite eligibility criteria meant and prescribed for Lekhpal for being promoted from Chainman. Said exercise be undertaken by the District Magistrate, Muzaffar Nagar preferably within three months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order, after affording full opportunity to Rakesh Kumar and Shafique Ahmad. In case there are other incumbents, similarly situated qua them also action be taken after affording opportunity of hearing. 7. Subject of above observation/direction made above, present writ petition is dismissed. 8. Office is directed to issue certified copy of this order to learned Standing Counsel for ensuring compliance of the order and doing needful in the matter. ————