Devendra Kumar Arora,J.:- Notices on behalf of opposite parties have been accepted by Sri R.K. Kushwaha, learned counsel. 2. By means of present writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 27.01.2012, as contained in Annexures-1, 2 and 3 to the writ petition, by which the opposite party no.2 asked the petitioners to ensure the beginning of construction work of new school building, in their concerned school premises within three days. 3. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners are Headmaster in their respective Institutions run by the Basic Education Department and are posted in Block Paliya Kalan, Kheri. By means of impugned orders, they have been directed to ensure the beginning of construction work in their concerned school premises within three days, otherwise their payment of salary will be stopped and the direction will be issued for taking action against them. 4. Further submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the provisions of Section 27 of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 provides that "no teacher shall be deployed for any non-educational purposes other than the decennial population census, disaster relief duties or duties relating to elections to the local authority or the State Legislatures or Parliament, as the case may be." 5. Further submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that assigning the duty, which is not part and partial of the petitioners, is against the provisions of the aforesaid Act. 6. I have considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. 7. Admittedly, the petitioners are Headmaster of the Institutions run by the Basic Education Department and they are supposed to perform the teaching work in their respective Institutions. So far as the construction work of the Institutions is concerned, it is the job of the authorities to get the same done through some executing agency and there is no question of involving the teachers in construction work. Their involvement can only be to the extent of supervision of construction work done by concerned agency, so that quality may be maintained. 8. If the teachers are involved in the construction work, firstly the teaching work will be adversely affected and secondly, they will compel to perform such job, for which they are not trained. Their involvement can only be to the extent of supervision of construction work done by concerned agency, so that quality may be maintained. 8. If the teachers are involved in the construction work, firstly the teaching work will be adversely affected and secondly, they will compel to perform such job, for which they are not trained. In order to protect the interest of students and their studies, this Court feels that action of the opposite party no.2 involving and pressuring the teachers for construction work is not sustainable in the eyes of law, rather, the same is violation of the provisions of Section 27 of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. 9. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 27.01.2012, so far as it relates to the petitioners, is hereby quashed and the opposite parties are directed not to interfere in the teaching and academic activities of the petitioners as well as other teachers of the concerned Institutions. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. No order as to costs. _________