Judgment (Hon’ble B.S. Verma, J.) By means of this petition, the petitioners have sought the following relief- 2. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 28-8-2009(Annexure no.6 to the writ petition) passed by respondent no.1 and impugned order edated 2-9-2009 passed by respondent no.2(Annexure No. 7 to the writ petition) and impugned order dated 2-9-2009 (Annexure No. 8 to 28 to the writ petition) passed by respondent no.4, so far these impugned orders relate to the petitioners. 3. According to the petitioners all of them, except petitioner No.9, Smt. Seeta Bora, who is Head Mistress, are assistant teachers working substantively/ permanently in different Govt. Junior High Schools. Subsequently the Junior High Schools were upgraded to High Schools. After upgradation the Government had appointed eight L.T.Grade Teachers including Head Master in each of those Schools, vide Government Order dated 02-01-2009 and a committee was also constituted to adjust the surplus teachers to other Junior High Schools. Therefore, pursuant to Government Order dated 02-01-2009, the petitioners have been adjusted in different institutions and they had joined their duties at different places. But by the impugned orders, Annexure Nos. 6, 7 and 8 to 28, the adjustments were cancelled. According to the petitioners the impugned orders have been passed with malice. They are neither in the public interest nor on administrative grounds, therefore, these orders are not sustainable in the eyes of law. 4. The respondents filed the counter affidavit and alleged that the State Government has taken a policy decision that Head Master/Assistant Teacher of Junior High School, who are working in upgraded Junior High Schools to High School are to be adjusted in Junior High Schools and for this purpose a Committee was constituted and as per recommendation of the said Committee adjustments of petitioners were made in Junior High Schools within the District. On 28-8-2009 the State Govt. also issued another Govt. Order No. 697/XXIV-2/09/05(21)/2009, by which it was directed that the adjustments were made in violation of Govt. Order dated 2-1-2009, as such the Director of Education, Uttarakhand was directed to cancel the said transfers of 97 teachers with immediate effect. Hence, the impugned orders, cancelling the adjustments, have been passed. 5. On 28-8-2009 the State Govt. also issued another Govt. Order No. 697/XXIV-2/09/05(21)/2009, by which it was directed that the adjustments were made in violation of Govt. Order dated 2-1-2009, as such the Director of Education, Uttarakhand was directed to cancel the said transfers of 97 teachers with immediate effect. Hence, the impugned orders, cancelling the adjustments, have been passed. 5. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and going through the material available on record, I find that the main ground for cancellation of the adjustment order was delay in complying the directions mentioned in G.O. dated 2-1-2009. The contention of the respondents is that in the Government Order dated 2-1-2009 it was specifically provided that the adjustment should be done within 15 days from the issuance of the order. However, the Committee so constituted for the purpose of adjustment could be made recommendation with delay and the adjustment of the petitioners could be done after a lapse of six months. 6. It is pertinent to mention here that if the adjustment orders were made after 15 days from the date of issuance of the Government Order dated 2.1.2009 and delay was caused on the behest of the State Government and its instumentalities, then for this lapse on the part of Government, petitioner could not be allowed to suffer. It appears that the impugned orders have been passed without there being any reasonable ground, therefore, the same are liable to be cancelled. 7. The petition is allowed. The impugned orders, dated 28.8.2009 passed by respondent No.1, Annexure No.6 to the writ petition, dated 2-9-2009, passed by respondent No.2, Annexure No.7 to the writ petition, and impugned order dated 2-9-2009 passed by respondent No.4, Annexure 8 to 28 to the writ petition, are hereby quashed. 8. However, it is provided that in future if there exists any exigency, then the petitioners may be transferred to the existing posts, in accordance with law.