Order : 1. By way of filing this petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 05.04.2019 passed by the Appellate Authority by which the appeal preferred by the petitioner against her termination order dated 22.05.2017 has been rejected on a technical count of delay. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was terminated from service by the respondents vide order dated 22.05.2017. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a single mother and she was having 10 years old son and suffering from several health conditions and even she was for a considerable time, hence delay has occurred in filing the appeal before the Appellate Authority. Learned counsel submits that instead of deciding the appeal on its merits and demerits, the same has been rejected vide impugned order dated 05.04.2019 on a technical count of delay. Learned counsel submits that, in the interest of justice, the matter be remitted back to the Appellate Authority with a direction to decide the same on its merits after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents opposed the prayer made by counsel for the petitioner and submitted that no justified reason has been assigned by the petitioner for the delay in filing the appeal before the Appellate Authority, hence under these circumstances, the Appellate Authority has not committed any error in rejecting the appeal by treating the same as time barred. Learned counsel submits that, under these circumstances, interference of this Court is not warranted. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on the record. 5. Perusal of the record indicates that the services of the petitioner were terminated by the respondents vide order dated 22.05.2017 against which the petitioner preferred an appeal on 31.05.2019 and the petitioner has tried to explain reasons of delay that the petitioner being a single mother of a minor child, who was suffering from several health conditions and she was operated for gall bladder and under medical treatment for a considerable time, so this was the reason of delay for filing the appeal but without considering the same, the Appellate Authority has rejected the appeal not on merits but on the technical count of barred for limitation. 6. 6. In the considered opinion of this Court, the petitioner has explained the reasons of delay, which has been overlooked by the Appellate Authority in deciding the appeal vide order dated 05.04.2019 stands quashed and set-aside. The matter is remitted back to the Appellate Authority to hear and decide the appeal on its merits after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner expeditiously as early as possible preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. Stay application as well as all applications (pending, if any) also stand disposed of.