JUDGMENT : A.K. Goswami, J. 1. Heard Mrs. N. Saikia, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. Also heard Mr. SK Ghosh, learned Standing Counsel, Secondary Education Department, appearing for respondent Nos.1, 3 and 4 and Mr. P Nayak, learned Standing Counsel, appearing for respondent No.2. 2. By filing this intra-Court appeal, the appellant has called into question the order dated 10.7.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) 3401/2017 whereby the writ petition preferred by the appellant was dismissed. In the said writ petition, the appellant had prayed for quashing of the order dated 24.3.2017 issued by the Director of Secondary Education, Assam whereby the claim of the appellant for grant of graduate scale of pay was not favourably considered. The aforesaid order dated 24.3.2017 was passed pursuant to an order of this Court dated 24.11.2016 passed in a writ petition instituted earlier by the appellant, which was registered as WP(C) 2021/2012, requiring the Director of Secondary Education to consider the case of the appellant for grant of graduate scale of pay. 3. The appellant has, in the meantime, retired from service on 31.12.2014 as a Music Teacher in Madan Mohan Madhab Charan Girls’ Higher Secondary School (for short, MMMC Girls’ School), Karimganj. The school was provincialised on 1.10.1977. A perusal of the materials on record indicates that the Managing Committee of the School had appointed the appellant by a resolution being Resolution No.6 adopted on 19.7.1991 as an honorary Music Teacher (instrumental). The resolution No.6 of the Managing Committee goes to show that there was no sanctioned vacant post of Music Teacher for appointment of the appellant and therefore, he was appointed in honorary capacity. It also appears from the said resolution that there was no advertisement for appointing a Music Teacher on honorary basis and the appointment was made to the appellant as he was willing to serve on honorary basis. 4. It is also noticed that at the time when the appellant was appointed in the said honorary capacity, there was a Music Teacher in M.M.M.C. Girls’ School by the name of Smti. Nilima Dev. A post of Music Teacher in graduate scale of pay having been sanctioned by the Government on 16.11.1991 and the post having been allotted to the M.M.M.C. Girls School, Smti. Nilima Dev was upgraded to the graduate scale of pay, which is Rs.1375-3375. Consequent upon the post held by Smti. Nilima Dev. A post of Music Teacher in graduate scale of pay having been sanctioned by the Government on 16.11.1991 and the post having been allotted to the M.M.M.C. Girls School, Smti. Nilima Dev was upgraded to the graduate scale of pay, which is Rs.1375-3375. Consequent upon the post held by Smti. Nilima Deb falling vacant, which was in the scale of pay of Rs.1065-2095, considering that the appellant was working in the school on honorary basis, his service was regularised by an order dated 4.6.1994 in the said post in the scale of pay of Rs.1065-2095. 5. At the relevant point of time, Assam Secondary Education (Provincialisation) Service Rules, 1982 was regulating the recruitment and conditions of service of teachers in High and Higher Secondary Schools which had been provincialised. The post of Music Teacher in such school was to be filled up by way of direct recruitment after making due advertisement and selection. Admittedly, the appellant had not gone through the aforesaid process of selection. 6. Though during the course of argument, Mrs. Saikia, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that in similar circumstances, many Music teachers working in provincialised Higher Secondary Schools had been granted graduate scale of pay by the departmental authorities and the appellant has been discriminated by not granting graduate scale of pay to him, there is no material to indicate that they are similarly circumstanced as the appellant. Attending facts and circumstances indicate that there was only one post of Music Teacher in the graduate scale of pay in M.M.M.C. Girls’ school. 7. Assuming that such teachers, who had been granted graduate scale of pay by the departmental authorities are similarly circumstanced as that of the appellant, in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, it will be impermissible for this Court to issue a direction only on the ground that someone similarly situated had been granted benefit though not entitled to. Equality under Article 14 of the Constitution is a positive concept which cannot be endorsed in the negative way. Equality clause cannot be invoked to perpetuate illegality. Learned Single Judge had considered all these aspects of the matter and we are in agreement with the conclusions arrived at. 8. In the aforesaid view of the matter, we find no merit in this appeal and accordingly, the same is disposed of.