MAST RAM Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) C .M.P. No. 176 of 2001, I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. The application is allowed.

(2.) THE petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated Jan. 1, 1999 passed by Estate Officer, Northern Railway, Ambala Cantonment and confirmed by the Additional District Judge, Shimla in C.M.A. No. 3-S/14 of 1999 on June 18, 2001.

(3.) BEING aggrieved by the order passed by the Estate Officer, the petitioner, who is the wife of Mast Ram preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority considered the facts and circumstances. It was argued before the Appellate Authority that Mast Ram was mentally disturbed and was not in a position to defend the case. On merits also no action could have been taken by the authorities.