JUDGMENT : K.M. Jospeh, J. There is delay of 67 days in filing the appeal. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. In the circumstances, the delay condonation application is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal stands condoned. 4. The Appeal is lodged against the order dated 30.11.2015, by which the learned Single Judge, though apprised of the fact that the application of the writ petitioner for the post of Lecturer (Hindi) was beyond the last date, purely provisionally directed that the candidature of the writ petitioner be also considered making it clear that it will be subject to the final determination of the writ petition. 5. We heard Mr. B.D. Kandpal, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Uttarakhand Public Service Commission. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant would point out that the issue has been considered by the Division Bench of this Court on two occasions and this was brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge; and the learned Single Judge ought to have followed the same, instead, according to him, without giving any reasons, the decision was taken. 7. We notice two things. Firstly, we would think that the impugned decision is in the form of a purely interim order. It is, no doubt, true that even the learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the interim order is in the nature of a final order; but we also take note of the fact that after the impugned decision was taken, the appellant has complied with the said order. Therefore, as things stand today, we would stand dissuaded from interfering with the decision which we would think is in the nature of an interim order. 8. We only request the learned Single Judge to dispose of the matter at the earliest. Subject to the same, the Appeal will stand dismissed.