JUDGMENT : ANIRUDDHA BOSE, J. 1. These four appeals, appearing against serial nos. 19, 20, 26 and 27 of the day’s list, are admitted. By consent of learned Advocates appearing for the parties, these appeal are taken up for hearing together at this stage only as the disputes involved in all these matters relate to identical questions of law and similar factual issues. 2. We are apprised by learned counsel appearing for the parties that the appellants are all teaching staffs of Government Schools and they were initially appointed as Assistant Teachers in Matric-untrained scale. Subsequently they claim to have had obtained Teachers Training degree – Shiksha Visharad from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad. It has turned out later on that these institutions were not eligible to award such degree. Before the learned First Court, the appellants/writ petitioners failed to demonstrate any valid recognition of their degrees. 3. The appellants were granted Grade-II scale of pay on the strength of such degrees, which were later on found to be invalid. Such scale of pay was withdrawn by the educational authorities through a Memorandum bearing no. 1084 dated 13th April, 2017. A copy of the said Memorandum has been annexed to the Memorandum of Appeal in L.P.A. No.380 of 2017 at page 51. This memorandum was issued by the District Superintendent of Education, West Singhbhum, Chaibasa. Legality of the said memorandum was challenged by the appellants in individual writ petitions before a learned Single Judge of this Court. The writ petition of the appellant in L.P.A. No.380 of 2017 was dismissed by the learned First Court holding :- “4. Order dated 27.02.2001 records that Hindi Sahitya Sammelan does not conduct any Teachers Training course. It only conducts examination through various centres in the country. For this reason, it has been found that Hindi Sahitya Sammelan is not required to seek recognition from NCTE for conducting examination of Shiksha Visharad. Notification issued by the University Grants Commission, in which at Sl. No. 135Shiksha Visharad is mentioned, is the notification by which equivalence of two courses has been notified. Similarly, notification of Ministry of Home Affairs would not make the degree awarded by the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan a valid degree, for it merely conducts examination. Notification issued by the University Grants Commission, in which at Sl. No. 135Shiksha Visharad is mentioned, is the notification by which equivalence of two courses has been notified. Similarly, notification of Ministry of Home Affairs would not make the degree awarded by the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan a valid degree, for it merely conducts examination. In view of the clarification noted in order dated 27.02.2001 by National Council for Teacher Education, evidently neither order dated 27.02.2001 nor notifications of either University Grants Commission or the Ministry of Home Affairs lends support to the case of the petitioner. The petitioner has failed to produce a circular/notification of the Government of Jharkhand under which Teachers Training degree-Shiksha Visharad granted by the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan has been recognised a valid qualification for appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher. On the point of recovery after recall of order granting promotion in Grade-II, the learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to decision in “State of Punjab and Others vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) and Others” (2015) 4 SCC 334 , however, he has failed to establish that the petitioner who is a Assistant Teacher is a Class-III employee of the State Government. 5. In the above facts, finding no merit in the writ petition, it is dismissed.” 4. The same reasoning has been given for dismissing the writ petitions of the other three appellants. Before us, the only point urged at the time of hearing of the appeal was legality of the degree to justify the promotion granted to the appellants. 5. Since the degree of the Shiksha Visharad was not from a recognized institution, we do not find any flaw in the reasoning in the judgment of the learned First Court. We accordingly dismiss these appeals. 6. There shall be no order as to costs. 7. As we have dismissed the appeals, the four connected applications being I.A. Nos.5762 of 2017, 5943 of 2017, 1525 of 2018 and 4665 of 2018 shall also stand dismissed.