By the Court.—Petitioner’s claims for allotment of Fair Price Shop as dependent of deceased’s fair price shop dealer. The claim has been rejected on the ground that definition of ‘dependents’ defined in Government Order dated 7.4.2004 does not include grandson.

2. It is contended that definition of “members of family” is illustrative and therefore, the grandson should also be deemed to be included therein. Reliance has been placed on decision of this Court in Urmila Devi v. Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Ltd., 2003 (3) UPLBEC 2582. In the writ petition for the purpose of definition of “family members”/’relatives’, petitioner has relied on Government Order dated 17th August, 2002 and has filed a copy thereof as Annexure 6 to the writ petition.

3. In the counter-affidavit, respondents have appended a copy of Government Order dated 7.4.2004, which according to them would hold the field in the case in hand. Relevant extract of aforesaid Government Order reads as under :

Þmi;qZDr fo"k;d 'kklukns'k la[;k & 2714@29&6&2002&162 lk0 2002 fnukad&17 vxLr] 2002 ,oa 'kklukns'k la[;k&2715@29&6&2002&162 lk0@2001] fnukad 17 vxLr] 2002 dk d`i;k lUnHkZ xzg.k djsa ftuds dze'k% izLrj&7 ,oa iz