UPADHYA SINGH AND ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                       WRIT - C No. - 10334 of 2026

Upadhya Singh 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 12.08.2024 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
13.01.2015, Bhola Kumar, son of the petitioners suffered fatal injuries
and died. Arising therefrom, the petitioners instituted a claim petition on
07.04.2015. It has been decided on 12.08.2024, almost nine 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 more than sixty years of age 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
                                                       WRIC No. 10334 of 2026
                               2

be released at present though the 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. Petitioners
are more than 60 years of age. They have waited for almost nine 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 12.08.2024 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
                                                                                           WRIC No. 10334 of 2026
                                                                   3

                                    bearing term deposit in a nationalized bank for a period of three years.


                                    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