Shabihul Hasnain, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri S. K. Verma, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the opposite parties. The case of the petitioners are that they are Sahayika working in different places as mentioned in their affidavit. The case as set out in the writ petition is that the District Magistrate on a particular date made a surprise inspection and found that the said Sahayika Centres were closed and there was nobody to attend the work. The District Magistrate vide his letter No. 480/STDM/2008 dated 2nd December, 2008 instructed the District Programme Officer, Hardoi to conduct enquirer for the purpose of terminating the contract of the petitioners. As a consequence thereof a show cause notice was issued to the petitioners by the Child Development Programme Office on 19.12.2008. Petitioners submitted their explanation and reply to the show cause notice but without considering the reply and explanation of the petitioners, the impugned order of cancellation of contract was passed. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that there is total non application of mind and the order of termination of their contract has been passed on the dictates of the superior authorities i.e. District Magistrate. Such an order will be bad on the ground that the there was non-application of mind. Secondly, the impugned order was passed without considering the reply which will be hit by the principles of natural justice. It is a fit case were the interim orders will be required to protect the interest of the petitioners. A supplementary affidavit has also been filed which is taken on record. Petitioner has stated in this affidavit that neither any advertisement for the said post on which the petitioners were working, has been published nor anybody has been appointed on the said vacancies. Learned Standing Counsel prays for and is granted three weeks' time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affiliated, if any, may be filed within a week thereafter. List immediately thereafter. Meanwhile, the operation and implementation of the order dated 29.01.2009 passed by the opposite party No.6 shall remain stayed. It is clarified that this order will not come in the way if any other action is taken in future against the petitioners.;