Shivanand Biswash and Another vs Union of India and Another

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 14248 of 2026

¶3

Shivanand Biswash And Another

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

Union Of India And Another	.....Respondent(s
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Amit Kumar Sinha, Deepali Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Deep Mala Srivastava, C.S.C.

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Court No. - 5

¶9

HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J.

¶10

Heard Ms. Deepali Srivastava Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. Deep Mala Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondents.

¶11

This Court on 16.04.2026, sought instructions. Today, instructions have been produced, which are taken on record and marked as Appendix ‘A’.

¶12

The case of the petitioner is that on the fateful day, i.e. on 06.08.2023, son of the petitioner, namely, Badar Kumar, met with an untoward railway accident, received grievous injuries resulting into death. A Claim Petition No. OA(IIu)/BSB/1254/2020, Shivanand Biswash & Another vs. Union of India came to be preferred, which came to be decided on 26.11.2025 awarding compensation to the tune of Rs.8,00,000/- with the interest @ 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.

¶13

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

¶14

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.

¶15

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

¶16

WRIC No. 14248 of 2026

¶17

2

¶18

of the legal heirs.

¶19

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

¶20

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 26.11.2025. 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%.

¶21

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 26.11.2025 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.

¶22

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.

¶23

Accordingly, the award dated 26.11.2025 passed in Claim Petition No. OA(IIu)/BSB/1254/2020, Shivanand Biswash & Another vs. Union of India is modified.

¶24

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.

¶25

WRIC No. 14248 of 2026

¶26

3

¶27