JUDGMENT : Surya Kant, J. 1. The petitioner joined the respondent-Bank as a Junior Clerk-cum-Cashier on 20th May, 1983. He was subsequently promoted in the Officers Category, Scale-I. The petitioner was served with a charge sheet dated 17th October, 2014 under the Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bank (Officers & Employees) Service Regulations, 2010 (hereinafter referred to as 2010 Regulations') and after holding a regular inquiry, he has been compulsorily retired from service vide order dated 14th November, 2017. The petitioner filed Departmental Appeal under Regulation 49 of the above-stated 2010 Regulations on 27th December, 2017. The Appellate Authority under the Regulations is the Chairman of the Bank. The said Appeal was declined by an Officer in the rank of General Manager vide order dated 30th December, 2017. The petitioner again represented by way of an Appeal to the Chairman of the Bank on 12th February, 2018 followed by another representation on 27th September, 2018, but finding no response thereto and questioning the authority of the General Manager in deciding the Appeal, the instant writ petition has been filed. 2. The respondent-Bank has taken two-fold objections to the petitioner's claim. Firstly, it is stated that the purported communication dated 27th December, 2017 cannot be treated as an 'Appeal' under the 2010 Regulations and secondly, the petitioner filed the Appeal on 12th February, 2018, which is time barred though has not yet been formally decided by the Appellate Authority. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and are satisfied that the intent of the representation dated 27th December, 2017 (Annexure P-6) was to submit an Appeal by the petitioner under Regulation 49 of 2010 Regulations. The same was filed within time. The subsequent representation-cum-Appeal dated 12th February, 2018 or the representation dated 27th September, 2018 are elaboration of the grounds which the petitioner had taken in the original Appeal dated 27th December, 2017. 4. The General Manager of the Bank, therefore, ought not to have taken up the Appeal dated 27th December, 2017 and the most appropriate recourse for the Bank was to put up the same before the Chairman, namely, the Appellate Authority for adjudication. Assuming that the petitioner filed the Appeal only on 12th February, 2018, still it cannot be said to be hopelessly time barred and it would be in the interest of justice, fair and just play to entertain and adjudicate that appeal on merits. 5. Assuming that the petitioner filed the Appeal only on 12th February, 2018, still it cannot be said to be hopelessly time barred and it would be in the interest of justice, fair and just play to entertain and adjudicate that appeal on merits. 5. For the reasons afore-stated, the writ petition is allowed to the extent that the order dated 30th December, 2017 of the General Manager (Annexure P-7) is annulled and the Appeal dated 27th December, 2017 as subsequently elaborated on 12th February, 2018/27th September, 2018 (Annexures P-6, P-8 and P-8/1) are directed to be placed before the Chairman of the Bank for adjudication on merits. The Chairman-cum-Appellate Authority shall decide the Appeal within two months. It shall be appreciated if the petitioner is heard in person before deciding the Appeal. The date, time and venue of the hearing of the Appeal shall be communicated to the petitioner on his last address given, by way of registered post and also on his e-mail address, which is available with the respondent-Bank. 6. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.