Pursottam vs Union Of India And Another

1. Heard Sri Shiv Babu Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Gambhir Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. This Court on 23.03.2026, sought instructions. Today, instructions dated 06.05.2026 have been produced, which are taken on record and marked as Appendix ?A?.

3. The case of the petitioner is that on 08.03.2021, the son of the petitioner was traveling by a local train from Vikhroli to Thakurli Railway Station holding a second class journey Ticket bearing no. AFC0546277 and he accidently fell down from the running train and sustained injury and died. Thereafterr a Claim Petition being Case No. OA(IIU/BSB/261/2025 (Purushottam V/s Union of India through General Manager, Central Railway, CST, Mumbai) seeking Rs.8,00,000/- compensation, which came to be decided on 18.02.2026 awarding compensation to the tune of Rs.8,00,000/- and as per the order in question only 20% was released and 80% was directed to be deposited in the fixed deposit.

5. Aggrieved against the non-release of the entire amount the present petition has been preferred.

6. Learned counsel for the writ petitioners has submitted that there is no logic or rational in not releasing the 80% amount, particularly, when the admissibility and the entitlement stands endorsed by the Tribunal. Submission is that in case only 20% amount is being extended then it would be just like a drop in the ocean which would not be an appropriate.

7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the 20% amount so released and 80% so directed to be invested is for the benefit of the legal heirs.

8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records carefully.

9. Apparently, on account of the accident, which occurred and death of the deceased, the legal heirs preferred proceedings before the Tribunal which came to be decided on 18.02.2026. The only question which remains before this Court is whether there is any logic or not in investing 80% of the amount and releasing 20%.

10. In the opinion of the Court, since the writ petitioners are before this Court seeking an appropriate direction for release of the 80% amount on account of financial circumstances and dire need of the resources at this stage and bearing in mind the fact that on a specific query being raised to the learned counsel for the respondents whether the Railway has challenged the award dated 18.02.2026 or not, the answer is in negative, as the Railway do not propose to question the same, thus, in the light of the intervening facts and the circumstances, the matter requires to be considered.

11. 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 legal heirs of the deceased 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.

12. Accordingly, the award dated 18.02.2026 passed in Claim Petition No. OA(IIU/BSB/261/2025 (Purushottam V/s Union of India through General Manager, Central Railway, CST, Mumbai) is modified.

13. Let 50% of the awarded amount to the tune of Rs. 4 lakhs along with proportionate interest is released in favour of the petitioners 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.

14. With the above observations, the present writ petition is disposed of.

15. 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.

16. Also, this order shall be passed independent of the right of the petitioners to claim enhancement, if any.

(Vikas Budhwar,J.)

May 6, 2026

N.S.Rathour