Dakshya Putel v. Union Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

FAO No.122 of 2022 Dakshya Putel & Another ....

Appellants -versusUnion of India ....

Respondent

CORAM:

JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

ORDER

06.05.2022 Order No.

1.

1.

This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

2.

On the oral prayer made by Mr. Das, learned counsel for the Appellants he is permitted to correct the case number mentioned in the prayer portion of the appeal memo in Court today. He is also permitted to remove Defect No.9(c) in Court.

3.

This appeal is filed by the Claimants, who are the husband and son of deceased Subanti Putel, under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 (for short 'the Act, 1987') being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 25th March, 2022 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhubaneswar Bench, Bhubaneswar (for short, 'the learned Tribunal') in OA No.95/2018 assailing the mode of payment of compensation amount.

// 2 // 4.

At the outset, learned counsel for the parties submit that the legal issue involved in this appeal is similar to FAO Nos.262 of 2020 and batch of appeals disposed of by this Court vide judgment dated 9th September, 2021 and the present Appeal may be disposed of in the light of the said judgment. 5.

Mr. S.Panda, learned Central Government Counsel for the Railways-Respondent, however, submits that although the facts and law involved in this case is similar, but Claimant should approach learned Tribunal by filing appropriate application for variation in the condition and mode of payment of the compensation amount.

In that event, learned Tribunal will be in a position to pass necessary orders on their application.

6.

Mr. S. Das, learned counsel for the Appellants submits that since Railways could not produce any material before the learned Tribunal to justify restriction in disbursement of compensation, remittance of the matter to learned Tribunal will be an empty formality only, and thereby the claimant(s) will be highly prejudiced. It appears from the impugned award that learned Tribunal has not assigned any reason for not disbursing the entire awarded amount in favour of the Claimant instead of directing a major portion to be deposited in a fixed deposit scheme.

It appears that the Claimants/Appellants being the husband and son of

// 3 // deceased Subanti Putel are major and do not have either any physical or mental disability. As such, the case of the Appellants is squarely covered by the ratio decided in the aforesaid batch of appeals.

7.

Accordingly, it is directed that learned Tribunal shall disburse the awarded amount by liquidating the fixed deposits, if any, to the claimant(s) on proper identification, as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of one month from the date of filing of an application along with certified copy of this order following due procedure of law.

The Claimant(s)/Appellant(s) is/are directed to submit his/her (their) A/c details of any nationalized bank as per the requirement along with the application form for disbursal of the compensation amount, as aforesaid.

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Subrat