SMT SONIYAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

                        WRIT - C No. - 18253 of 2026

Smt Soniya
                                                                 .....Petitioner(s)
                                     Versus
Union Of India And Another
                                                               .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)             :   Deepali Srivastava, Shiv Binayak
Counsel for Respondent(s)             :   Dinesh Kumar Misra, A.S.G.I.

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

1. Heard Ms. Deepali Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners and
Sri Dinesh Kumar Misra, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that he is well equipped with
the instructions and the instructions are self-sufficient for disposal of the writ
petition and he does not propose to file any further affidavit and the petition
be decided on the basis of the documents available on record, thus with the
consent of the parties, writ petition is being decided at the fresh stage.

3. The case of the writ petitioners is that on fateful day of 16.06.2019,
Prabha Kol @ Parmanand son of the petitioner in an untoward railway
accident received grievous injuries resulting in death. That upon the death of
the son of the petitioner, he preferred a claim application before The
Railway Claims Tribunal, Lucknow Bench and same was registered as
OA/(Ilu)/LKO/431/2019 Smt. Soniya Versus Union Of India. Later on, it
was transferred to the Allahabad Bench and registered as
OA/(IIu)/ALD/1907/2020 (Smt. Soniya Versus Union Of India). The said
petition came to be decided by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Allahabad on
29.08.2024 awarding compensation a sum of Rs. 8,00,000/- wherein 10% of
the amount was only released and 90% was directed to the deposited in fix
deposit receipt. Aggrieved against the deposit of 90% of the total amount of
Rs. 8 lakhs, the present writ petition has been preferred seeking a direction
to the Railway Claims Tribunal, Gorakhpur, Bench Gorakhpur to release the
entire amount as awarded on 29.08.2024.

4. 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
the ocean which would not be an appropriate.
                                                          WRIC No. 18253 of 2026
                                 2

5. 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.

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

7. Apparently, on account of the accidents which occurred and death of the
deceased, the legal heirs preferred proceedings before the Tribunal which
came to be decided on 29.08.2024. 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%.

8. 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 29.08.2024 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.

9. 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.

10. Accordingly, the award dated 29.08.2024 passed in Claim Petition
No. OA/(IIu)/ALD/1907/2020 (Smt. Soniya Versus Union Of India) is
modified.

11. 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.

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.
                                                                                              WRIC No. 18253 of 2026
                                                                     3

                                    14. Also, this order shall be passed independent of the right of the petitioners
                                    to claim enhancement, if any.
                                    May 18, 2026
                                    Ashu
                                                                                              (Vikas Budhwar,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad