ORDER : R.P. Sethi, J. - The dispute in this appeal relates to non-selection of the appellant to the post of Section Officer, Level II. It is admittedly a promotional post. It is also a common ground that the appellant had passed the Final Accounts Examination, which is a condition precedent under Rule 14(1) for being considered to the promotional post of Section Officer, Level II. It is also not disputed that the 3rd respondent had passed the Final Accounts Examination on 16-8-1996. It is also not in dispute that the 3rd respondent is senior in service to the appellant. 2. On 28-9-1995, DPC was held to consider the eligible candidates for promotion to Section Officer, Level II. 1-1-1995 was declared to be the cut-off date. The vacancy in the said promotion post was to occur on 1-10-1995. On this cut-off date the 3rd respondent was not eligible as he had not passed the Final Accounts Examination. The Department, however, referred the matter to the Government to relax Rule 14(1) to consider the claim of the 3rd respondent for promotion to the post of Section Officer, Level II. The Government, however, vide its order dated 20-11-1995 (Annexure III) rejected the said request of the Department and directed that DPC may be convened again and selection be made in accordance with the Rules. The Government accordingly issued intimation to the DPC to hold a meeting and start the selection process. This intimation was challenged by the 3rd respondent before the Administrative Tribunal, Orissa who obtained a stay. The appellant was not made party to that OA but he made an application to be impleaded as party since he was likely to be affected. The said application for intervention was, however, rejected by the Tribunal. The Tribunal considered OA No. 37 of 1996 filed by the 3rd respondent on merits and the judgment was delivered on 18-6-1996, wherein it was directed to convene the DPC meeting after publication of the Final Accounts Examination wherein the 3rd respondent Mr Brajbandhu Barik and others have appeared. As indicated earlier, the 3rd respondent passed his Final Accounts Examination on 16-8-1996 and consequently he became eligible falling within the zone of consideration for promotion to the post of Section Officer, Level II. On 21-9-1997 DPC was held and it recommended Respondent 3 for promotion to Section Officer, Level II. As indicated earlier, the 3rd respondent passed his Final Accounts Examination on 16-8-1996 and consequently he became eligible falling within the zone of consideration for promotion to the post of Section Officer, Level II. On 21-9-1997 DPC was held and it recommended Respondent 3 for promotion to Section Officer, Level II. In view of the recommendation of the DPC, Respondent 3 was promoted as Section Officer, Level II which gave cause of action to the appellant to challenge his appointment to the said promotional post. The Administrative Tribunal, Orissa rejected the OA filed by the appellant vide its order dated 3-2-1997. It is against this order passed by the Administrative Tribunal, Orissa the appellant has filed this appeal to this Court after obtaining the special leave. 3. It is unnecessary to go into the rival contentions raised before us. Learned counsel for the appellant fairly stated that his client (the appellant) is retiring within a month or so. Therefore, he urged that if there is any vacancy in the cadre of Section Officer, Level II, the appellant may be considered along with the other eligible candidates and DPC may hold the meeting expeditiously so that the appellant?s claim may be considered before he retires. Learned counsel for the State of Orissa could not persuade us to reject the suggestion made on behalf of the appellant. Having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we direct the State of Orissa to constitute the DPC and on such constitution the claim of the appellant along with the other eligible candidates may be considered expeditiously. The DPC may be constituted within three weeks from today so that the appellant, if found suitable, may be considered for promotion to the post of Section Officer, Level II. This is, however, subject to the availability of the vacancy. It is also made clear that if the appellant is found suitable and selected to the post of Section Officer, Level II, he may be appointed against the said vacancy when it arose or would arise before he retires so that the retiral benefits can be extended to him. It is also made clear that this order does not affect the promotion given to Respondent 3. 4. The appeal to stand disposed of. In the circumstances there shall be no order as to costs. Appeal disposed of.