Petitioner, which was the opposite party before the District Forum filed the appeal before the State Commission with a delay of 117 days.  The State Commission condoned the delay on 24.08.2009, copy of which has been attached as Annexure P-2 with this revision petition.  Later on, the State Commission by the

-2-

impugned order has dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation.  On a contention raised by the counsel for the petitioner that the State Commission after having condoned the delay on 24.08.2009 could not dismiss the appeal as barred by limitation on a later date, limited notice was issued to the respondent for today to show cause as to why the impugned order be not set aside and the case remitted back to the State Commission for a fresh decision on merits in accordance with law.

          Sh. Jitendra Kumar Jha has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent.  He fairly concedes that the State Commission had condoned the delay on 24.08.2009 and having done so, the State Commission could not dismiss the appeal as barred by limitation on a later date.  He has no objection to the setting aside of the order passed by the State Commission and remittance of the case to the State Commission for a fresh decision on merits in accordance with law.

          Accordingly, notice issued on 03.12.2010 is made absolute.  The order of the State Commission is set aside and the case is

-3-

remitted back to the State Commission for a fresh decision in accordance with law after hearing both the parties.

            Parties through their counsel are directed to appear before the State Commission on 11.05.2011.