Allahabad High Court
VIRENDRA PASWAN @ VIRENDRA RAM AND ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA
- Decided
- Bench
- MANISH KUMAR NIGAM
Holding
The High Court modified the award, directing release of 75% of the compensation (Rs. 6,00,000) with interest and ordering the balance to be deposited for three years.
Summary
The petitioners, parents of a son who died in a railway accident on 10‑08‑2018, challenged the Railway Accident Claims Tribunal's order that released only Rs. 80,000 of the Rs. 8,00,000 compensation awarded, directing the balance to be kept in a fixed deposit for three years. They argued that the partial release was inequitable and caused undue hardship after a six‑year delay in obtaining the award. The respondent, the Union of India, contended that the restriction was in the petitioners' interest as the deposited amount would accrue interest. The High Court held that while the principle of partial release is generally applied, it must be tempered by the specific facts and the hardship faced by the claimants. Accordingly, the court modified the award, ordering the release of 75% of the compensation (Rs. 6,00,000) with proportionate interest within four weeks and directing the balance to be invested in a high‑yield term deposit for three years. The writ petition was thereafter disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether the Railway Accident Claims Tribunal's order to release only Rs. 80,000 of the awarded compensation is just and equitable.
- Whether the High Court can modify the partial release order based on the petitioners' circumstances.
- Whether the principle of partial release and deposit can be varied in individual cases.
Subjects
- Railway Accident
- Compensation
- Railway Accident Claims Tribunal
- Partial release of award
- Fixed deposit
- Writ petition
- Modification of award
- Justice
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 10331 of 2026
Virendra Paswan @ Virendra Ram And Another
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Union of India
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mukti Nath Pandey, Pashupati Nath
Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I.
Court No. - 5
HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.
1. Heard Sri Pashupati Nath Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners,
Sri Prem Narayan Rai, learned counsel for the respondent and perused the
record.
2. The solitary grievance of the petitioners is that the amount of Rs.
80,000/- has been directed to be released in favour of the
claimant/petitioners by the impugned award of the Railway Accident
Claims Tribunal dated 12.01.2024 is inequitable, unjust and grossly
inadequate. It defeats the purpose of award of compensation for death
caused to the son of the present petitioners in a railway accident.
3. A perusal of the record reveals that in a railway accident occurred on
10.08.2018, Ranjan Kumar, son of the petitioners suffered fatal injuries
and died. Arising therefrom, the petitioners instituted a claim petition on
19.12.2018. It has been decided on 12.01.2024, almost six years after the
occurrence of the accident. Even then, by that award, the Tribunal has
awarded Rs. 8,00,000/- (in all) to the petitioners.
4. The Tribunal has provided for release of Rs. 80,000/- to the petitioners
and the balance is to be deposited in Fixed Deposit for a period of three
years.
5. 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. 80,000/- would be released at present though the
WRIC No. 10331 of 2026
2
petitioners claim that compensation of Rs. 8,00,000/- has been awarded.
At present, the petitioners pray for release of entire awarded amount.
6. 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.
7. 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 claimants who lost their son
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 claimant.
8. 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.
9. In the present case, petitioners are parents of the deceased. They have
waited for almost six 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. 8,00,000/-.
10. Accordingly, the award dated 12.01.2024 shall stand modified.
11. Let 75% of the awarded amount i.e. Rs. 6,00,000/- along with
proportionate interest be 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.
WRIC No. 10331 of 2026
3
12. With the above observations, the present writ petition is disposed of.
13. 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.
14. Also, this order has been passed independent of the right of the
petitioners to claim enhancement, if advised.
(Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
March 19, 2026
Nitika Sri.
Digitally signed by :-
NITIKA SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…