Order 1. This intra Court appeal filed by the appellant by leave of this Court, is directed against two interim orders passed on 15.03.2019 and 27.09.2019 in SWP No. 546/2019 entitled Irfan Ahmad Khan Gojar vs. State of J&K and others, which is pending adjudication before the Writ Court. 2. Before we proceed to consider the grounds of challenge, we think it proper to give few background facts which have led to filing of this appeal. 3. The respondent No.1, on the strength of Scheduled Tribe Category certificate issued and verified by the competent authority sought his consideration against the post of Sub Inspector of Police (Executive). The respondent No.1 made it to the select list under ST category and accordingly recommendations for his appointment as Sub Inspector of Police (Executive) were made by the official respondent in the year 2016. The appointment order, however, was not issued and aggrieved he filed SWP No. 546/2019 and the learned Writ Court, vide order dated 15.03.2019 directed the Deputy Inspector General of Police to consider the case of the writ petitioner for his appointment as Sub Inspector on the strength of selection and recommendation made by the Selection Committee. Before the Writ Court, it was pointed out that the ST Category certificate, on the strength of which the writ petitioner was seeking his appointment as Sub Inspector, had been cancelled by the Deputy Commissioner, Anantnag vide order No. 104/2019 of 2019 dated 06.05.2019. The aforesaid order was, however, subject matter of challenge in OWP No. 1695/2019. The Writ Court, in OWP No. 1695/2019, had passed an interim order on 23.05.2019 directing the official respondents not to act upon the cancellation order. It appears that during the pendency of the writ petition the Deputy Inspector General of Police, SKR, Anantnag complied with the order dated 15.03.2019 and submitted a compliance before the Writ Court along with copy of order of appointment of respondent No.1. Taking note of the aforesaid development the Writ Court, in terms of impugned order dated 27.09.2019, provided that appointment of respondent No.1 (the Writ petitioner) shall remain subject to outcome of the writ petition and subject to writ petitioner’s submitting an undertaking before the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court that in the event the writ petitioner does not succeed in the writ petition, he shall reimburse all the amount taken on account of such appointment. 4. 4. The appellant herein, which is an association of Gujjar and Bakerwal Community, had also moved an application seeking its impleadment as party respondent in the writ petition and the same was pending consideration of the Court when the impugned order dated 27.09.2019 was passed. To put the record straight, the appellant had filed the application for impleadement as party respondent before the Writ Court on 27.05.2019. 5. Feeling aggrieved of the impugned interim orders the appellant filed the instant appeal by seeking leave of this Court as the appellant had yet not been impleaded as party respondent by the Writ Court. This Court, vide order dated 27.11.2019 granted leave to the appellant to assail the impugned order dated 27.09.2019 and also provided that there shall be stay of the effect and operation of the impugned orders dated 15.03.2019 and 27.09.2019. 6. The order of this Court dated 27.11.2019 was assailed by respondent No.1 before Hon’ble the Supreme Court by way of SLP titled Irfan Ahmad Khan Gojar vs. Gujjar and Bakerwal Community and ors. The Hon’ble Supreme Court stayed the impugned order dated 27.11.2019 passed by this Court in the instant appeal. The Supreme Court took note of the fact that before filing the appeal, the impugned orders dated 15.03.2019 and 27.09.2019 had been complied with and the writ petitioners stood selected as Sub Inspector in J&K Executive Police and he had also joined on the same day. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, however, made it clear that High Court should proceed to decide the LPA on merits and that there was no stay of the proceedings. This is how we have considered the appeal. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, we, at the outset, point out that the impugned orders in this appeal are interim and subject to objections from the respondents in the writ petition. It is also desirous to be noted that the orders impugned in this appeal have since been complied with by the official respondents and the respondent No.1 (writ petitioner) has already been appointed as Sub Inspector in J&K Police, (Executive). In that view of the matter this appeal has virtually become fait accompli. 8. It is also desirous to be noted that the orders impugned in this appeal have since been complied with by the official respondents and the respondent No.1 (writ petitioner) has already been appointed as Sub Inspector in J&K Police, (Executive). In that view of the matter this appeal has virtually become fait accompli. 8. When confronted with the aforesaid position, the learned counsel appearing for both the sides fairly conceded that the merits of controversy projected in this appeal are required to be adjudicated upon by the Writ Court and the order of appointment issued in favour of respondent No.1 (writ petitioner), pursuant to the interim orders passed by the Writ Court and protection afforded by Hon’ble the Supreme Court will remain subject to the outcome of the writ petition. 9. In view of the aforesaid, we are of the view that this appeal, which is directed against the impugned orders since implemented by the official respondents, has become a fair accompli and, therefore, deserves to be disposed of by providing as under:- (1) That, as stated by the learned counsel for the parties, the identical matters, which are clubbed together, (SWP No. 2307/2018 and connected matters), are listed for consideration of the learned Single Judge on 8th of December, 2020, the writ petition SWP No.546/2019, from which this appeal has arisen, shall also be listed and considered along with the aforesaid batch of petitions. (2) The application of the appellant, filed on 27.05.2019 for impleadment as party respondent, shall be considered in the first instance before considering the matters on merit. (3) That the appointment of respondent No.1 (writ petitioner) made in compliance to the impugned interim directions shall remain subject to outcome of the writ petition. 10. Ordered accordingly. 11. Registry shall list SWP No. 546/2019 along with SWP No. 2307/2018 and connected matters on 8th of December, 2020.