Orissa High Court
Saraswati Das And Others vs Union Of India Represented ... on 15 November, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
FAO No.179 of 2022
Saraswati Das and Others .... Appellants
Mr. Satyaban Sahoo, Advocate
-versus-
Union of India represented through its
General Manager, East Coast Railway, .... Respondents
Bhubaneswar and Another
Mr. Alok Mohanty, C.G.C.
CORAM:
SHRI JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
ORDER
15.11.2022
Order No.
02. 1. The matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Heard Mr. S. Sahoo, learned counsel for the Appellants and Mr.
A. Mohanty, learned Central Government Counsel for Respondent -
Union of India.
3. Present appeal by the claimants is directed against the
impugned judgment dated 25th April, 2022 of learned Member
(Technical), Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhubaneswar Bench passed in
OA(IIU)/101/2018.
4. The Appellants are aggrieved by the direction of the tribunal
regarding mode of deposit of the compensation amount. Mr. Sahoo,
learned counsel for the Appellant also submits that the direction of the
tribunal giving Rs.50,000/- to the father of the deceased, namely
Gahma Das, who was treated as applicant No.5 in the impugned
judgment despite the contentions of the applicants that he was not a
dependent being found missing and having been not heard of more
than 15 years, is unsustainable.
5. Challenge in the present appeal regarding mode of deposit is
squarely covered by the decision of this court rendered in FAO
No.262 of 2020 and batch, disposed of on 9th September, 2021.
6. Accordingly, the direction of the tribunal is modified in terms
of the principles decided in the aforesaid decision of this court to the
effect that, the entire compensation amount paid in favour of claimant
- Appellants No.1 and 4, namely Saraswati Das and Ujali Das be
disbursed in their favour by keeping 50% of the amount fall due to
them in separate fixed deposits in any Nationalized bank for a period
of five years. The amount fall due to the share of the minor claimant -
Appellant No.2 and 3, namely, Sujita Das and Suraj Das be kept in
fixed deposits for a period of five years or till they attain majority,
whichever is later.
7. So far as the direction of the tribunal regarding grant of
compensation to the tune of Rs.50,000/- given in favour of the father -
Gahma Das is concerned, no illegality is seen in the approach of the
tribunal keeping in view the definition of dependents contained in
Section 123(b) of the Railways Act. However, since the
uncontroverted fact remains that the father is not heard of and missing
for last 15 years, the direction of the tribunal is modified to the extent
that the amount of Rs.50,000/- to be kept in suitor's account for a
period of three years, shall be transferred to the account of the mother,
namely Ujali Das (Applicant No.4) in case no claim is raised by said
Gahma Das (Applicant No.5) within three years. In case said Gahma
Das appears within three years, the amount shall be transferred to his
account in terms of the direction of the tribunal.
8. With aforesaid observations and directions, the appeal is
disposed of.
9. An urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.
( B.P. Routray)
Judge
M.K.Panda
