JUDGMENT : 1. The petitioners have approached this Court with a prayer for a direction upon the respondent-authorities for issuance of appointment letter to the petitioners for the post of Intermediate trained Assistant Teacher under non-para category for respective districts, in which they have been selected and wherein their name found place in provisional list. 2. The short facts lying in narrow compass is that in light of the direction of the Respondent No. 2, an advertisement was issued in different Districts of Jharkhand by the concerned District Superintendents of Education with the approval of the concerned Deputy Commissioner. Pursuant thereto, the petitioners along with other candidates being eligible, applied for the intermediate trained Assistant Teacher under 'Non-Para' Category for different District. All of them qualified in the process of selection and their names were reflected in the merit list issued by the District Education Establishment Committee of the concerned District. Thereafter, the petitioners submitted their representation before the concerned respondents i.e. District Superintendent of Education, requesting therein for issuance of appointment letter in favour of the petitioners, but the respondents are not paying any heed to the said representations of the petitioners. Subsequently, the petitioners were called for counseling in concerned District wherein, the petitioners in some of the district were allowed to appear in their counseling, while in some other districts, the respondents have deprived the candidates to appear in the counseling. But till date, the respondents have not issued the appointment letter in favour of the petitioners and are sitting tight over the matter. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have been compelled to knock the door of this Court for redressal of their grievances. 3. Mr. Piyush Krishna Choudhary, learned counsel appears on behalf of the petitioners submits that various candidates, who had applied under non-para category in the District of Chatra, Simdega, Khunti and other districts, have been appointed and working and the respondents are taking discriminatory view, so far as the present petitioners are concerned, which is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Learned counsel further submits that the condition adopted in some of the districts in the ongoing selection process after the publication of the advertisement and the procedure adopted in the selection is illegal and impermissible in the eyes of law. Learned counsel further submits that the condition adopted in some of the districts in the ongoing selection process after the publication of the advertisement and the procedure adopted in the selection is illegal and impermissible in the eyes of law. Learned counsel lastly argues that the case of the petitioners may be considered for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher under the Non-para category as they fulfills all the requisite criteria, the respondents have illegally and arbitrary not considered the case of the petitioners. 4. Per contra, counter affidavits have been filed on behalf of the respondents. Learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents very fairly submits that issues involved in this writ petition have already been decided by a coordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court in its judgment delivered on 02.03.2017 in W.P.(S) No.6031 of 2015 & W.P.(S) No. 173 of 2016 and since the Hon’ble Court has dismissed the said writ applications, this case may also be dismissed in view of the observations made in W.P.(S) No.6031 of 2015 & W.P.(S) No. 173 of 2016. 5. After hearing the learned counsel for the respective parties and on perusal of the records, this Court is not inclined to interfere and accede to the prayer of the petitioners as the similar issue fell for consideration before this Hon'ble Court in W.P.(S) No.6031 of 2015 & W.P.(S) No. 173 of 2016 and vide order dated 02.03.2017, a co-ordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court was of the view that:- Equality or equity has no place in case of any irregularity or illegality. The view of this Court gets fortified by the judgment dated 12th May, 2016 passed in Civil Appeal No. 5035-5036 of 2016 of the Hon'ble Apex Court, rendered in the case of Kulwinder Pal Singh & Anr. Vs. State of Punjab & Ors., wherein, the Hon'ble Apex Court has been pleased to, inter alia, hold as under:- Article 14 of the Constitution of India is not to perpetuate illegality and it does not envisage negative equalities. Merely because some persons have been granted benefit illegally or by mistake, It does not confer right upon the appellants to claim equality.” 6. As a cumulative effect of the aforesaid judicial pronouncement, rules, guidelines and observations, I do not find any merit in the instant case. Resultantly, this writ petition stands dismissed.