PRADEEP NANDRAJOG,J. - (1.) The issue which arises for consideration in the writ petition is: whether the observations in paragraph 10 of the order dated
(2.) 5.2012 of the Tribunal allowing OA No.398/2011 filed by the writ petitioner constitute a binding direction upon the Union of India. The observations in paragraph 10 of the order in question read as under:- "10. Here, the Tribunal is faced with a difficult task- the documentary evidence on both sides are evenly arrayed. Sending a Welfare Inspector for enquiry at this point of time would serve no purpose as the deceased employee has been dead for more than 2 years now. Decision could be taken on the basis of the evidence on record for either side..." 2. If the observations are to be read as an expression of opinion by the Tribunal that a Welfare Officer cannot be sent for enquiry, the second question would arise: whether the report of the Welfare Inspector can be considered. If the second question is answered that the Union of India could send the Welfare Inspector, the main issue regarding dependance of the writ petitioner would need to be decided.
(3.) Relevant facts are that late Rajesh Choudhary, brother of the petitioner was an employee of the Railways. He was unmarried. He died on 10.10.2009. The father of the writ petitioner and late Rajesh Choudhary, Shri Mana Ram Choudhary was an employee in the Railway Protection Force and superannuated from service on 31.8.2003. He is a person of means and is drawing pension.;