HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 33260 of 2025 Court No. - 9 HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J. 1. Shri Prem Narayan Rai, Advocate appears on behalf of respondent and filed his memo of appearance which is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. The solitary grievance of the petitioners is that only Rs. 60,000/- of the amount has been directed to be released in favour of the claimants/petitioners by the impugned award of the Railway Accident Claims Tribunal dated 03.06.2024 is inequitable, unjust and grossly inadequate. It defeats the purpose of award of compensation for death caused to the husband of the petitioner no.1 and son of petitioner no. 3, in a railway accident. 4. A perusal of the record reveals that in a railway accident occurred on 21.06.2015, Vikas Kumar, husband of petitioner No. 1 and son of petitioner nos. 3, and father of petitioner no. 2 suffered fatal injuries and died on spot. Arising therefrom, the petitioners instituted a claim petition on 01.03.2016 which has been decided on 03.06.2024, almost eight years after the occurrence of the accident. Even then, by that award, the Tribunal has awarded Rs. 8,00,000/- (Rs. 4,00,000/- has been awarded to petitioner no. 1(wife) Rs. 2,00,000/- has been awarded to father of the deceased (petitioner nos. 3), and Rs. 2,00,000/- has been awarded to minor children of the deceased (petitioner no. 2). 5. The Tribunal has provided for release of Rs. 60,000/- to the petitioners and the balance is to be deposited in Fixed Deposit for a period of three Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ashok Kumar Singh, Gaurav Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I. Smt. Madhu Devi And 2 Others .....Petitioner(s) Union Of India And Another .....Respondent(s) years. 6. Petitioners are aggrieved by the wholly inadequate amount directed to be released, in a mechanical manner. Looking at the total compensation awarded, a sum of Rs. 60,000/-would be released at present though the petitioner nos. 1 & 3 claim that compensation of Rs. 6,00,000/- has been awarded. At present, the petitioners pray for release of at least fifty per cent of the awarded amount to the petitioner no. 1 (wife) and petitioner no.3 (father). 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Railways would submit that the order restraining release of ninety per cent of the award is only in the interest of the petitioners as they are likely to receive a higher amount after three years upon accrual of interest. 8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, while there can be no dispute to the principle universally applied in such cases where part compensation amount is released at the time of the award being made and the balance amount is invested for the benefit of the claimants, at the same time, it cannot be applied as a rule of thumb in all cases. In that, individual facts and circumstances must dictate the exercise of discretion, in such matters. The claimant/petitioner no.1 who lost her husband and on who certain dependency may also be claimed cannot be forced to litigate for years to earn an award of compensation and then be made to wait for further years to receive that compensation owing to exercise of discretion by the Court, ostensibly in the interest of such claimants. 9. Therefore, the above principle invoked by the learned Tribunal must be blended with practicality so as to release a reasonable amount, keeping in mind the overall circumstances of the case. 10. In the present case, petitioner No. 1 is the wife of the deceased and petitioner Nos. 3 father of the deceased respectively. They have waited for eight years from the occurrence of death for award of the compensation. The compensation awarded at the moment is also not excessive but a modest sum of Rs. 6,00,000/-. WRIC No. 33260 of 2025 2 11. Accordingly, the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners for release of at least fifty per cent of the awarded amount to the petitioner no. 1 (wife) and petitioner nos. 3 (father), is found to be wholly just and proper. Accordingly, the award dated 03.06.2024 shall stand modified. 12. Let 50% of the awarded amount i.e. Rs. 2,00,000/- along with proportionate interest be released in favour of the petitioner no. 1 (wife) and 50% of the awarded amount i.e. Rs. 1,00,000/- to the petitioner nos. 3 (father) within a period of four weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The balance amount shall be invested and retained in highest bearing term deposit in a nationalized bank for a period of three years. Amount awarded to minor children of the deceased shall remain deposited in fixed deposit as directed by the Tribunal. 13. With the above observations, the present writ petition is disposed of. 14. It is made clear that any amount paid in compliance of the award may be adjusted against the amount to be released in pursuance of this order. 15. Also, this order has been passed independent of the right of the petitioners to claim enhancement, if advised. September 22, 2025 Ved Prakash WRIC No. 33260 of 2025 3 (Manish Kumar Nigam,J.) Digitally signed by :- VED PRAKASH SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- VED PRAKASH SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad