KOMALversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                        WRIT - C No. - 14156 of 2026

Komal
                                                             .....Petitioner(s)
                                   Versus

Union Of India And Another
                                                           .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)        : Amit Kumar Sinha, Deepali Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent(s)        : A.S.G.I., Brijesh Kumar

Court No. - 5
                    HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J.

1. Heard Ms. Deepali Srivastava Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner
and Sri Brijesh Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. This Court on 15.04..2026, sought instructions. Today, instructions have
been produced, which are taken on record and marked as Appendix ‘A’.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that he does not propose to
file any affidavit and he is in a position to argue the matter. Thus, with the
consent of the parties, the petition is being decided at the fresh stage.

4. The case of the petitioner is that on the fateful day i.e. 27.06.2023, met
with an accident and received grievous injury resulting into permanent
disability. The writ petitioner approached the Railway Claims Tribunal,
Allahabad being Case no. OA/(IIU)/ALD/96/2024 (Komal vs. Union of
India), which came to be allowed on 18.07.2025 awarding compensation to
the tune of Rs.4,00,000/- with an interest of 9% per annum and as per the
order in question only 10% was released and 90% 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 and on 15.04.2026, this Court sought instructions.

6. Learned counsel for the writ petitioners has submitted that there is no
logic or rational in not releasing the 90% amount, particularly, when the
admissibility and the entitlement stands endorsed by the Tribunal.
Submission is that the petitioners are in dire need of the said amount and in
case only 10% amount is being extended then it would be just like a drop in
                                                         WRIC No. 14156 of 2026
                                2


the ocean which would not be an appropriate.

7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the
10% amount so released and 90% 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 accidents which occurred, the writ
petitioner preferred proceedings before the Tribunal which came to be
allowed on 18.07.2025. The only question which remains before this Court
is whether there is any logic or not in investing 90% of the amount and
releasing 10%.

10. In the opinion of the Court, since the writ petitioners are before this
Court seeking an appropriate direction for release of the 90% 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 18.07.2025 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 claimant whose left leg was amputated
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.

12. Accordingly, the award dated 18.07.2025 passed in Claim Petition No.
OA/(IIU)/ALD/96/2024 (Komal vs. Union of India) is modified.

13. Let 50% of the awarded amount to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/- along with
proportionate interest is released in favour of the petitioner within a period
                                                                                             WRIC No. 14156 of 2026
                                                                    3


                                    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 petitioner
                                    to claim enhancement, if any.

                                    May 7, 2026
                                    N.S.Rathour

                                                                                             (Vikas Budhwar,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad