ANITA M GOHIL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside the communication dated 19.03.2011 as well as order dated 30.03.2010 passed by the respondent No.4. BY the order dated 30.03.2010, respondent No.3 informed the petitioner that the petitioner has been paid 50% of the risk fund and the remaining 50% have been encashed in favour of Shri Pratapbhai Chauhan, guardian of Gohil Paras Mahendra who is the son of the petitioner and her husband through his first wife who expired on 18.11.1999. BY the order dated 19.03.2011, the respondent No.3 informed the petitioner that since there are two claimants i.e. petitioner and Shri Pratapbhai Chauhan, both the claimants are eligible for benefits.

(2.) WE have heard Mr. Nagesh Sood, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Shakeel A. Qureshi, learned Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4, Mr. Sandeep N. Bhatt, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.5.

(3.) IN view of the above observation and direction, this petition stands disposed of accordingly.