IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 15222/2026 Decided on: 03.09.2026 Yankit Palmo …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. ……………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Amit Singh Chandel, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J The petitioner feels aggrieved against the office order dated 29.08.2026. In terms of the said office order, the petitioner, who was serving as Head Teacher at GPS Palling, E/B Nichar, was promoted to the post of Central Head Teacher on regular basis and, consequent upon her promotion, was transferred to GCPS Rupi, E/B Nichar. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had already preferred a representation on 28.07.2026 to the respondents, with a prayer that, after her promotion as Central Head Teacher, she should be adjusted at Katgoan, where the post 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2 was likely to fall vacant, and the writ petition, Yankit Palmo Vs. State of H.P. & Ors2. preferred by her in that regard, was disposed of on 04.08.2026 with direction to the respondents to decide petitioner's representation dated 28.07.2026 within twelve weeks. However, before deciding petitioner's representation, the respondents issued the office order dated 29.08.2026. 3. Petitioner's contentions are misplaced. The representation preferred by the petitioner was in anticipation of her promotion. Such representation was premature when it was preferred. Be that as it may, learned Additional Advocate General has also placed on record office instructions dated 02.09.2026 issued by the Director of School Education, along with office order of the even date, rejecting petitioner's representation on the ground that, upon the promotion of eligible Head Teachers, including the petitioner, to the post of Central Head Teacher, their consequent postings had already been ordered on 29.08.2026. 4. Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner is presently aged 57 years and is due to retire on 30.06.2027, this writ petition is disposed of with liberty reserved to the petitioner to prefer a representation seeking adjustment in view of her impending retirement. In case such representation is made within one week from today, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with 2 CWP No. 13247 of 2026 decided on 04.08.2026 3 law, in terms of the applicable transfer policy and keeping in view petitioner's impending retirement, within two weeks thereafter. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioner. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 3rd September, 2026 (Rohit)