JUDGMENT : Sahidullah Munshi, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed challenging the decision of the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Cooch Behar rejecting the petitioner’s prayer for grant of Post-Graduate scale of pay. 2. The petitioner has stated that having qualification Kamil in Arabic with M.M. Degree he applied for the post of Assistant Teacher in Arabic/Theology in Senior Madrasah. The petitioner participated in the selection process of 1st Regional Level of Selection Test (AT) 2007. In the said selection process the petitioner was selected for being appointed as Assistant Teacher in Arabic/Theology subject in a senior Madrasah in the Pass category having qualification M.M. The petitioner was issued a Memo dated 1st October, 2008 by the member secretary committee for selection of teachers in Madrasah addressed to the secretary of the Madrasah concerned. On the basis of the result of the 1st Regional Level Selection Test 2007 and on the basis of option exercised by the selected candidate, namely, the petitioner herein, in the counseling, the committee recommended the name of the candidate mentioned in the said memo for appointment against regular vacancy in the post of Assistant Teacher in Arabic (Madrasah) Adv. Arabic/Theology. After his appointment the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.) Cooch Behar issued a Memo on 24th December, 2008 whereby the petitioner’s appointment in Arabic (Madrasah) Adv. Arabic/Theology in the Pass category was approved with effect from 6th November, 2006. Such order of approval is borne out from page 55 of the writ petition. In the said order of approval the District Inspector of Schools mentioned that scale of pay would be given to the petitioner as per G.A. Rules. The grievance of the petitioner is that, although, he possessed the qualification M.M. and he was appointed with the qualification M.M. with Kamil Degree, the authority has purportedly allowed the petitioner to enjoy a Pass category scale, i.e., Rs.3,800/- – 7775/- instead of Rs.6,000/- – 12,000/- even after January 1, 2009 when a circular came to that effect. It has been stated by the petitioner that as per Memo No.215-ME dated 20th September, 2007 issued by the Director of Madrasah Education, the teacher having qualifications M.M./M.F./M.U. (revised) (i.e., with Kamil Degree) is entitled to enjoy scale of pay of Rs.6,000 – 12,000/- and as per notification no. It has been stated by the petitioner that as per Memo No.215-ME dated 20th September, 2007 issued by the Director of Madrasah Education, the teacher having qualifications M.M./M.F./M.U. (revised) (i.e., with Kamil Degree) is entitled to enjoy scale of pay of Rs.6,000 – 12,000/- and as per notification no. 1040-MD dated 17th July, 2008 issued by the Minority Affairs and Madrasah Education Department, Government of West Bengal, the M.M. qualification obtained from 1980 onwards have been declared as equivalent to Post-Graduate Degree and subsequently, by Memo No.150-MD dated 30th January, 2009 the Minority Affairs and Madrasah Education Department fixed the scale of pay for teachers holding qualification M.M. with effect from 1st January, 2009. Accordingly, the petitioner made representation on 7th September, 2015 for grant of post graduate scale for his M.M. Degree. The said representation has been annexed to the petition being Annexure P-4. From a Memo dated 28th December, 2010, issued by the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Cooch Behar, addressed to the Secretary/Headmaster of the High Madrasah concerned it appears that the said District Inspector of Schools declined to include the M.M. qualification of the petitioner in the approval of appointment of the petitioner. The said representation being not considered by the concerned authority the petitioner filed a writ petition being W.P. No.25880 (W) of 2015 before this Hon’ble Court which was finally disposed of by an order dated 13th October, 2015 and by the said order the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Cooch Behar was directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner filed on 7th September, 2015 in pursuance of the said order passed by this Court. The District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Cooch Behar heard the matter on 29th February, 2016 and communicated his order dated 8th March, 2016 under Memo No.231/5/SSH dated 8th March, 2016 and thereby rejected the prayer of the petitioner for grant of Post-Graduate scale of pay. The said order dated 8th March, 2016 has been challenged by this writ petition. By the order impugned the District Inspector of Schools has clearly mentioned that in the first Regional Section Test (A.T.) 2007 for the post of Assistant Teacher, Arabic subject (Pass category) as per recommendation of the selection committee, the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher at Munshirhat Sadekia High Madrasah (H.S.) in Arabic subject Pass category. The petitioner joined this post on 6th November, 2008. The petitioner joined this post on 6th November, 2008. He had been drawing Graduate scale of pay since the date of joining. Later on, the petitioner prayed for Post-Graduate scale of pay for his M.M. qualification. It has been recorded that the Headmaster of the Madrasah, who appeared before the District Inspector of Schools, stated that the petitioner joined as Post-Graduate teacher as per recommendation of the selection committee and he had been drawing Post-Graduate scale of pay from the date of joining. He has also stated that no Resolution had been adopted in the meeting of the selection committee regarding Post-Graduate scale of pay in favour of the petitioner. The District Inspector of Schools held that, although, in the earlier G.O. dated 30th January, 2009 Post-Graduate scale of pay for M.M. qualification was allowed with effect from 01.01.2009 but, by virtue of the clarifications contained in G.O. No.560-MD/O/6M-40/07 dated 31st March, 2010 the teacher will not automatically enjoy the said scale as they were not recruited against the vacancy meant for Post-Graduate (M.M.) Degree holders but they may appear before the West Bengal Madrasah School Service Commission against vacancy notified for Post-Graduate (M.M.) teacher as in-service candidate and get the benefit of the said scale on being selected by the said School Service Commission keeping the other existing benefit obtained by the said teacher intact. By the order impugned the District Inspector of Schools rejected the petitioner’s prayer for grant of Post-Graduate scale of pay of M.M. qualification. 3. The petitioner has alleged in paragraph 8 of the writ petition that a number of Assistant Teachers appointed in senior Madrasah through the School Service Commission having qualification M.M. were allowed to enjoy Post-Graduate scale with effect from 01.01.2009 particularly in Bhurkunda Emdadia Senior Madrasah and Nurun Nabi Senior Madrasah by the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), North 24-Parganas. However, no averment has been made by the petitioner about the appointment whether the same was in Pass category or Post-Graduate category. Therefore, such allegations cannot be the basis for grant of Post-Graduate scale of pay to the petitioner. 4. It is undisputed that the petitioner acquired M.M. qualification before his selection as an Assistant Teacher. When the vacancies were notified he opted for the Pass category scale of pay but not the Post-Graduate scale. Therefore, such allegations cannot be the basis for grant of Post-Graduate scale of pay to the petitioner. 4. It is undisputed that the petitioner acquired M.M. qualification before his selection as an Assistant Teacher. When the vacancies were notified he opted for the Pass category scale of pay but not the Post-Graduate scale. Once he has opted a particular category despite having Post-Graduate Degree he has to be satisfied with the said category of scale of pay, he cannot switch over to the other category after being appointed because the number of vacancies and other criteria vary from Pass category to Post-Graduate category. Persons appointed in the Pass category cannot claim at par with those who had to pass during the selection process held for the Post-Graduate category. Therefore, this Court does not find any infirmity in the order passed by the District Inspector of Schools. 5. Moreover, it is undisputed that the District Inspector of Schools, by his Memo dated 28th December, 2010, declined to include the M.M. qualification of the petitioner in the order of approval of the petitioner. This Memo has neither been challenged, nor has it been set aside. Therefore, the District Inspector of Schools has to act in conformity with his earlier Memo. 6. However, while passing the order impugned the District Inspector of Schools has not taken into consideration of the provisions of Section 14 of the West Bengal Schools (Control of Expenditure) Act, 2005. Section 14 of the said Act is extracted below :- “14. (1) Every teacher of a school shall, if appointed in the post of Undergraduate teacher category, be entitled to draw pay in the scale of pay in which he is appointed and shall not be entitled to claim any additional increment or higher scale of pay of acquiring any qualification other than the qualifications specified for such post. (2) Every teacher of a school shall, if appointed in the post of Graduate teacher category, be entitled to draw pay in the scale of pay in which he is appointed and shall not be entitled to claim any additional increment or higher scale of pay for acquiring any qualification other than the qualifications specified for such post. (2) Every teacher of a school shall, if appointed in the post of Graduate teacher category, be entitled to draw pay in the scale of pay in which he is appointed and shall not be entitled to claim any additional increment or higher scale of pay for acquiring any qualification other than the qualifications specified for such post. (3) Every teacher of a school shall, if appointed in the Honours Graduate for Post-graduate teacher category, be entitled to draw pay of Post-graduate teacher category, upon acquiring Post-graduate degree, in the manner as may be specified by order.” 7. Sub-Section (2) of the aforesaid Section 14 specifies that if a teacher is appointed in the Post-Graduate teachers category he will be entitled to drawing pay in the scale of pay in which he is appointed and will not be entitled to claim any additional increment or higher scale of pay for acquiring any qualification other than specified for such post. Sub-Section (3) specifies that a teacher of a school, if appointed in the Honours Graduate or Post-Graduate teaching category, are entitled to draw pay of Post-Graduate teaching category upon acquiring Post-Graduate in the manner as may be specified by the order. Therefore, the said provision makes room for issuing clarificatory order in keeping with the provision of Section 14(2) and such clarification has been issued by the Government in 2010 and on the basis of which the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Cooch Behar, has passed the impugned order and the same cannot be said to be without jurisdiction. The provision of Section 14 evidently makes it clear that there are distinction between Pass category and Post-Graduate category and there is no provision for switching over from Pass category to Post-Graduate category unless one is recruited against the vacancy meant for Post-Graduate Degree. However, by the order impugned the District Inspector of Schools has kept open for the petitioner to get the benefit of availing the vacancy meant for Post-Graduate Degree and may appear before the West Bengal Madrasah School Service Commission against the vacancy notified for Post-Graduate teacher as in-service candidate and may get benefit of the said scale of being selected by the said School Service Commission keeping the other existing benefit obtained by the said teacher intact. 8. Mr. 8. Mr. De, Learned advocate appearing for the State, has relied on a decision in the case of State of West Bengal & Ors. – Vs. – Md. Sohidullah & Ors., reported in 2008(2) CHN 234 . In support of the impugned order passed by the authority concerned Mr. De relies upon paragraphs 14, 15 and 21 of the said judgment and those are set out below :- “14. On a combined reading of three circulars we feel that although Sohidullah and Nirupama did have requisite higher qualification being post-graduate and honors, as the case may be, they chose to compete for the pass category. Hence, they are not entitled to the benefit of the higher pay scale. 15. Mr. Bandyopadhyay’s contention that it violates article 14 of the Constitution, in our view, does not hold good. If a litigant who has a right knowingly does not contemporaneously exercise such right, cannot complain before the Court that he is not being given the benefit for the right which he did not contemporaneously exercise. 21. In such view of the matter, Sohidullah is not entitled to claim postgraduate scale as he was selected in pass category on the basis of his application. The learned Judge, in our view, erred in allowing the writ petition of Sohidullah.” 9. In support of his submission Mr. De has also cited the case of Tarak Chandra Roy – Vs. – State of West Bengal & Ors., reported in 2008(2) CHN 973 . In the said decision the Hon’ble Division Bench has categorically held as follows :- “We have considered the submission made by the learned Counsel. In our opinion, the petitioner being an appointee subsequent to the promulgation of the West Bengal School Service Commission Act, 1997 cannot be given the benefit of circular dated 22nd November, 1993 and 8th March, 2000. Petitioner having been appointed as Assistant Teacher pass category can only get the pay-scale specified by the Commission for that post. Even otherwise the benefit of circular dated 22nd November, 1993 and 8th March, 2000 would not confer any vested right upon the Assistant Teachers. No such right has been protected under the West Bengal Schools (Control of Expenditure) Act, 2005. In view of section 14 of the 2005 Act no graduate category teacher is entitled to claim any additional increment for acquiring any qualification than the qualifications specified for such post. No such right has been protected under the West Bengal Schools (Control of Expenditure) Act, 2005. In view of section 14 of the 2005 Act no graduate category teacher is entitled to claim any additional increment for acquiring any qualification than the qualifications specified for such post. The provision in section 16 would not be applicable to aid the claim of the petitioner as by virtue of section 20 of the 2005 Act the circulars and orders existing previously stand abrogated. That being the position of law, the petitioner would not be entitled to claim higher scale of pay. We, therefore, dismiss the writ petition.” 10. Having heard the parties and having considered the ratio decided in the said judgment, I am of the considered view that in the present case, the petitioner has failed to satisfy this Court that he is entitled to get higher scale of pay merely because he had higher qualification on the date of his initial appointment. According to the referred circulars, it is apparent that it is only when the Service Commission recommends the name of a candidate as a Honours or Post-Graduate candidate, he will be entitled to get the benefit of the higher scale of pay, but the higher qualification having not been mentioned in the recommendation of the Service Commission, the petitioner cannot claim higher scale of pay. Although, the petitioner had higher qualification, he chose to compete with the Pass category candidates and after competing with the candidates, who had lesser qualification when the writ petitioner got appointment, he cannot claim for higher scale of pay. In this connection, reference may be made to a judgment delivered by this Court in W.P. No.18044 (W) of 2016, which involved identical question of law. 11. Conduct of the petitioner cannot be appreciated. The petitioner was appointed in 2003 with Pass category scale of pay. His appointment was approved as a Pass category candidate. He never mentioned his higher qualification. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to get higher scale of pay. That apart, according to the ratio decided in the above-referred judgment it can be held that if a litigant who has a right knowingly does not contemporaneously execute such right, he cannot complain before the Court that he is not being given the benefit for the right which he did not contemporaneously execute. That apart, according to the ratio decided in the above-referred judgment it can be held that if a litigant who has a right knowingly does not contemporaneously execute such right, he cannot complain before the Court that he is not being given the benefit for the right which he did not contemporaneously execute. It has been further held in the said decision by the Hon’ble Division Bench that the petitioner’s contention that the action of the respondent authority is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, does not hold good. The Division Bench held that if a litigant who has a right knowingly does not contemporaneously execute that right, cannot complain before the Court that he has not been given benefit for the right which he did not contemporaneously execute. However, it is important to point out that the Division Bench, while deciding the issue, also discussed the ratio of a decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana – Vs. – Haryana Civil Secretariat Personnel Staff Association, reported in AIR 2002 SC 2589 where the Hon’ble Apex Court observed that equation of post, determination of pay-scale and other allied decision should be left to the Executive and not open for judicial review. 12. When a teacher appointed in a particular category, he will get the pay-scale of that category irrespective of his higher qualification. In the said decision the petitioner-teacher, although, a Post-Graduate, appeared in the interview as a Pass category candidate and, therefore, pay-scale of Post-Graduate teacher cannot be made available to the petitioner. Ratio of the decision cited above squarely covers the present case and, therefore, the petitioner’s contention fails and no relief can be given in this petition. There is no scope to interfere with the order impugned passed by the District Inspector of Schools (S.E.), Cooch Behar. 13. The writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. However, in the facts and circumstances of this case there will be no order as to costs.