ORDER : M.R. Shah, J. 1. All these applications are filed by common applicant, New India Assurance Company Ltd., for appropriate interim orders staying the respective judgment and order passed by the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Gandhidham, Kutch in respective Workmen's Compensation [Fatal/Non-Fatal] Cases during pendency and final disposal of the main First Appeals. 2. That the respective original-claimants have preferred Workmen's Compensation [Fatal] Cases No. 18/05, 19/05, 23/05, 24/05, 25/05, 38/05, 39/05, 40/05, 46/05, 47/05 and 42/06 on the death of their sole bread-earners and the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Kutch, has allowed all the aforesaid Workmen's Compensation Cases and he has not only directed the Insurance Company to pay the compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act but has also directed the Insurance Company to pay penalty to the extent of 50% of the awarded amount along with interest at the rate of 12% on the amount of compensation. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order passed by the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Kutch- Bhuj in aforesaid Workmen's Compensation Cases, the applicant Insurance Company has preferred First Appeals No. 3830 of 2006 to 3840 of 2006. The original- appellant, applicant herein, Insurance Company has also preferred the present Civil Applications No. 11706 of 2006 to 11716 of 2006 for staying the judgment and order passed by the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation during the pendency and final disposal of the aforesaid Appeals. 3. It appears from the record that, before filing the present Appeals the Insurance Company has deposited the amount as per the respective judgment and orders passed by the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation some where in the month of June/July 2006. It also appears that the Insurance Company preferred respective Appeals on 28.6.2006 along with Civil Applications for interim relief. It also appears from the record that after the amount was deposited and the Appeals and the present Applications were filed, the original-claimants who seem to be illiterates and very poor and coming from a lower strata of the society preferred applications through their Advocates on 8.8.2006 for permitting them to withdraw/pay the entire awarded amount out of the amount deposited by the Insurance Company. It is required to be noted that in the application dated 8.8.2006 it was specifically mentioned by the original-claimants that the Insurance Company has preferred First Appeals, however they have produced only Stamp Numbers and the Insurance Company has not obtained any interim order and that the matter has not come on Board. It appears from the record of Workmen's Compensation [Fatal] Case No. 38/05 and 42/05 that the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Gandhidham, Kutch-Bhuj passed the order on 8.8.2006 on the said applications directing the Insurance Company to produce the documentary evidence with regard to pending Appeals and adjourned the said applications to 1.9.2006. It also appears from the record that the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant-herein the Insurance Company produced Computer Status Report of the Appeals filed by the Insurance Company before this Court and requested not to disburse the amounts in favour of the original-claimants and/or not to permit the original-claimants to withdraw the amounts deposited by the Insurance Company and in the alternative it was requested that the original-claimants be directed to furnish Bank Guarantee and/or security for the said amounts which are permitted to be withdrawn by them. It appears that, inspite of the aforesaid objection and production of the Status Reports with regard to filing of Appeals and Civil Applications by the Insurance Company, the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Gandhidham, Kutch-Bhuj, Shri M.C. Vora, passed the order of disbursements in favour of original-claimants in part and the claimants are permitted to withdraw a substantial amount either in cash or by Account Payee Cheque without any security. The relevant Statement showing details of total amount awarded, amounts disbursed in favour of each claimant, is reproduced as under That thereafter, the Division Bench of this Court passed an order on 10.10.2006 admitting the main First Appeals and granted ad-interim relief in terms of paragraph 4(B) in each application. This Court also clarified that pending disposal of First Appeals if any amount is disbursed in favour of the workmen the said payment shall be subject to final outcome of First Appeals. Considering the above, and on perusal of the order passed by the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Gandhidham, Kutch dated 1.9.2006, it appears that inspite of production of Status Reports with regard to filing of Appeals by the Insurance Company, the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation Mr. Considering the above, and on perusal of the order passed by the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Gandhidham, Kutch dated 1.9.2006, it appears that inspite of production of Status Reports with regard to filing of Appeals by the Insurance Company, the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation Mr. M.C. Vora passed the order of disbursement in favour of the original-claimants/workmen who are illiterates, poor and coming from lower strata of the society and has permitted them to withdraw substantial amount and that too without obtaining any security. Though it was pointed out to the learned Commissioner that Appeals have been preferred wherein Civil Applications are also filed, it is not appreciable what was the hurry for the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Mr. Vora to disburse large amounts in favour of the workmen either by cash and/or by Account Payee cheques who are illiterates and very poor and who have lost their sole bread-earners. When it was pointed out to the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation that the Insurance Company has preferred Appeals by producing Status Report, the learned Commissioner ought to have given them sufficient time to produce the interim order and thereafter if within a reasonable time such interim order is not produced, in that case also he ought not to have allowed the claimants to withdraw the amounts by cash and/or by Account Payee cheques and that too without any security. The learned Commissioner ought to have appreciated and considered that if ultimately the Insurance Company and/or the appellant succeeds before this Court in Appeals then it will be very difficult for the appellant/Insurance Company to recover any amount from such original-claimants. 3.1 One another aspect, which was required to be considered by the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, before making any payment to the claimants who are illiterates and poor by cash and/or Account Payee cheques and in particular substantial and/or large amounts, was that as the claimants/workmen are poor and illterates and if such substantial and/or large amount is paid to them the same is likely to be frittered away misused or misapplied and the same actually may not reach them and that they will not be in position to enjoy the fruit as there is likelihood of some other person misusing the same. Under the circumstances, it was not even in the interests of original claimants/ workmen to pay them the large sum at one stroke. This Court has come across so many cases wherein a large sum has been directed to be paid over to the claimants/workmen either by cash and/or by Account Payee cheques and immediately after the payment the said amount has been frittered away. In one case, when the claimant had filed Claim Application for untimely death of her Son who was the sole bread-earner, the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Gandhidham, Kutch-Bhuj passed the order directing the Insurance Company to pay Rs. 4,50,440 by way of compensation along with interest at the rate of 12%, and 50% penalty, i.e. Rs. 2,25,220, and the Insurance Company, in all, deposited a sum of Rs. 7,24,578. The learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Gandhidham, Kutch, permitted the said claimant to withdraw a sum of Rs. 3,23,000 and directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 4,00,000 in Fixed Deposit, and the said unfortunate mother/claimant received such a huge amount of Rs. 3.23 lakhs by cash, and when against the order passed by the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation an Appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company, and this Court called the lady-claimant to know how the said amount of Rs. 3,23,000 is used by her, the said lady-claimant informed the Court that she has paid Rs. 50,000 to the Advocate towards professional fees and the rest of the amount is paid to relatives and some amount has been spent for religious ceremonies. Thus, within the short period of two months, the amount of Rs. 3,23,000 is spent by the poor lady. In another case, when this Court had called the claimant in connection with one another Appeal, this Court found that though the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Gandhidham, Kutch-Bhuj passed the order to pay Rs. 1,54,000 to the claimant by Account Payee Cheque, the said claimant (who is injured) has disclosed before this Court that he has received Rs. 60,000 only by cash and is not paid any other amount from his Advocate. Considering the above cases, this Court is of the firm opinion that some directions are required to be issued to the Commissioners for Workmen's Compensation to invest the amount awarded in Fixed Deposit in Nationalised Bank while passing the orders of disbursement. 60,000 only by cash and is not paid any other amount from his Advocate. Considering the above cases, this Court is of the firm opinion that some directions are required to be issued to the Commissioners for Workmen's Compensation to invest the amount awarded in Fixed Deposit in Nationalised Bank while passing the orders of disbursement. This Court is of the firm opinion that, as the claimant is allowed to withdraw substantial part of the awarded amount either by cash or by Account Payee cheque, as the said amount is frittered away, the purpose for which the compensation is awarded is not achieved. 4. The Division Bench of this Court in the case of Muljibhai Ajarambhai Harijan & Anr. v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Ors., reported in 1982(1) GLH Page 756, while dealing with payment of compensation under The Motor Vehicles Act issued guidelines to be followed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal while awarding compensation and has directed that care should be taken that amount is not frittered away. The Division Bench of this Court, in Para No.3 has observed as under "We are distressed to note that Claims Tribunal do not realise that it is not sufficient to award compensation to the victim of the accident or his legal representatives, as the case may be, but it is also its duty to ensure that the amount awarded is not frittered away. It must be remembered that lump-sum compensation is paid to the claims who are either the victims of the accident or their legal representatives by applying an appropriate multiplier with a view to providing for his or their future. In other words, instead of spreading out the amount of compensation over a number of years having regard to the estimated future life span, as a measure of convenience, lump-sum payment is ordered. If the whole or substantial part of the compensation money is paid to claimants who have never handled such huge amounts in their lives there is the danger of their frittering away the amount for want of fiscal discipline in their lives. If the amount is squandered away, which in all probability may happen, the socioeconomic objective intented to be achieved by the award of compensation will be wholly defeated. If the amount is squandered away, which in all probability may happen, the socioeconomic objective intented to be achieved by the award of compensation will be wholly defeated. We are, therefore, of the opinion that in such cases it is imperative on the Claims Tribunal to protect such claimants, no matter they are adults, by directing the investment of lump-sum compensation awarded to them. We are, therefore, not impressed by Mr. Desai's submission that since another Division Bench had in another appeal arising out of the common award directed 50% of the amount to be paid without security and the remaining 50% after furnishing security to the satisfaction of the Tribunal, we should make the same order in this application also. The nature of the interim order to be made must depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. But we think that by and large, if the Claim Tribunals bear in mind the interest of the claimants and direct that substantial amount out of the compensation awarded to the claimants is deposited in a Scheduled Bank in a long term fixed deposit, the Tribunals will be rendering service to claimants, many of whom may not have handled such substantial lump-sum in their lifetime and may find themselves unable to decide how best they should deal with the amount awarded to them. We think that, if this fact is borne in mind by the Claims Tribunals, the claimants will be placed in a happier situation because they will receive a steady income on their investment with the corpus remaining intact." In Para 5 of the above Judgment, the Division Bench observed as under "5. The Claims Tribunal while investing the said amount in long-term fixed deposits will also take care to see that the corpus remains intact so that no loan or advance is permitted on the said fixed deposit to the applicants by the Bank without obtaining its express order in that behalf. The Bank issuing the fixed deposit receipt should endorse on the face of the receipt that no loan or advance should be granted on the strength of that receipt unless there is an express order of the Tribunal in that behalf. Similar note should be made in the bank records to rule out the possibility of obtaining a loan or advance by taking out a duplicate receipt. Similar note should be made in the bank records to rule out the possibility of obtaining a loan or advance by taking out a duplicate receipt. On the expiry of the period of 5 years, the Claims Tribunal will consider whether the fixed deposit should be further extended and if so, for what period." After making above observations, the Division Bench issued the following broad guidelines having regard to the fact that day-in and day-out thousands of rupees are paid by way of compensation to various categories of claimants, and the Claims Tribunals are directed to follow such guidelines while disposing of Claim Applications arising under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, to scotch complaints of misapplication of compensation money (i) The Claims Tribunal should, in the case of minors, invariably order the amount of compensation awarded to the minor invested in long term fixed deposits at least till the date of the minor attaining majority. The expenses incurred by the guardian or next friend may however be allowed to be withdrawn (ii) In the case of illiterate claimants also the Claims Tribunal should follow the procedure set out in (i) above, but if lump sum payment is required for effecting purchases of any movable or immovable property, such as, agricultural implements, rickshaw etc., to earn a living, the Tribunal may consider such a request after making sure that the amount is actually spent for the purpose and the demand is not a rouge to withdraw money (iii) In the case of semi-illiterate persons the Tribunal should ordinarily resort to the procedure set out at (i) above unless it is satisfied, for reasons to be stated in writing, that the whole or part of the amount is required for expanding and existing business or for purchasing some property as mentioned in (ii) above for earning his livelihood, in which case the Tribunal will ensure that the amount is invested for the purpose for which it is demanded an paid (iv) In the case of literate persons also the Tribunal may resort to the procedure indicated in (i) above, subject to the relaxation set out in (ii) and (iii) above, if having regard to the age, fiscal background and strata of society to which the claimant belongs and such other considerations, the Tribunal in the larger interest of the claimant and with a view to ensuring the safety of the compensation awarded to him thinks it necessary to do order (v) In the case of widows the Claims Tribunal should be invariably follow the procedure set out in (i) above (vi) In personal injury cases if further treatment is necessary the Claims Tribunal on being satisfied about the same, which shall be recorded in writing, permit withdrawal of such amount as is necessary for incurring the expenses for such treatment (vii) In all cases in which investment in long term fixed deposits is made it should be on condition that the Bank will not permit any loan or advance on the fixed deposit and interest on the amount invested is paid monthly directly to the claimant or his guardian, as the case may be (viii) In all cases Tribunal should grant to the claimants liberty to apply for withdrawal in case of an emergency. To meet with such a contingency, if the amount awarded is substantial, the Claims Tribunal may invest it in more than one Fixed Deposit so that if need be one such F.D.R., can be liquidated. There guidelines are not exhaustive but are merely illustrative." 5. The guidelines laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in Muljibhai Ajarambhai Harijan's case [supra] came to be approved and reaffirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lilaben Udesing Gohel v. Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd., reported in 1996(3) GLR Page 5. While reaffirming the guidelines laid down by this Court in Muljibhai's case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court further observed in Para No.17 as under 17. Before we part we must observe that even though the guidelines laid down in Muljibhai case (supra), have been approved and applied by this Court in the aforementioned two cases, many Motor Accidents Claims Tribunals and even some of the High Courts in other parts of the country do not follow them. We are also told that in claims that are settled in or outside the Court or Tribunal, including Lok Adalats or Lok Nyayalayas, these guidelines are overlooked. We would like to make it absolutely clear that in all cases in which compensation is awarded for injury caused in a motor accident, whether by way of adjudication or agreement between the parties, the Court/Tribunal must apply these guidelines. We must add one further guideline to the effect that when the amount is invested in a fixed deposit, the bank should invariably be directed to affix a note on the fixed deposit receipt that no loan or advance should be granted on the strength of the said F.D.R. Without the express permission of the Court/Tribunal which ordered the deposit. This will eliminate the practice of taking loans which may be up to 80% of the amount invested and thereby defeating the very purpose of the order. We do hope that the Courts/Tribunals in the country will not succumb to the temptation of permitting huge withdrawals in the hope of disposing of the claims. We are sure that the Courts/Tribunals will realise their duty towards the victims of the accident so that a large part of the compensation amount is not lost to them. We do hope that the Courts/Tribunals in the country will not succumb to the temptation of permitting huge withdrawals in the hope of disposing of the claims. We are sure that the Courts/Tribunals will realise their duty towards the victims of the accident so that a large part of the compensation amount is not lost to them. The very purpose of laying down the guidelines was to ensure the safety of the amount so that the claimants do not become victims of unscrupulous persons and unethical agreements or arrangements. We do hope out anxiety to protect the claimants from exploitation by such elements will be equally shared by the Courts/Tribunals." 6. The aforesaid guidelines are laid down with respect to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal while awarding the compensation and passing the order with regard to disbursement under the Motor Vehicles Act. Considering the fact that in most of the Workmen Compensation Claim Applications, the original-claimants are illiterate, poor and coming from very lower strata of society and either they have lost their sole bread-earners and/or the original-claimant himself has suffered injuries (in non-fatal cases), there are all possibilities of frittering away the amount awarded by the Commissioner. It appears that in many of the cases, the claimants are in fact not aware what amount of compensation has been awarded to them and what is the actual amount deposited by the Insurance Company and the contractor/employer. In some cases, the claimants are informed that they are awarded the compensation as per the order, but they are not aware with regard to the amount deposited by the Insurance Company and/or the contractor/employer under the head of "Penalty and Interest". Thus, similar guidelines, which are issued in the case of Motor Accident Claims, are also required to be issued to all the learned Commissioners for Workmen's Compensation so that the amount awarded is not frittered away. As observed by the Division Bench in the case of Muljibhai [supra], if the amount is squandered away which in all probability may happen, the socio-economic objective intended to be achieved by the award of compensation will be wholly defeated. In most of the cases, the amount of compensation is frittered away because of various reasons including illiteracy or ignorance on the part of the victims towards their rights, influence of middlemen and heavy expenditure incurred in litigation including fees for the advocates. In most of the cases, the amount of compensation is frittered away because of various reasons including illiteracy or ignorance on the part of the victims towards their rights, influence of middlemen and heavy expenditure incurred in litigation including fees for the advocates. Considering the above, in the interests of claimants and the benevolent Act of Workmen Compensation and the purpose for which the amount of compensation is awarded is not defeated, while awarding the compensation and disposing of Claim Applications arising under the Workmen Compensation Act, and while passing the order of disbursement of the amount deposited by the Insurance Company and/or contractor/employer, all the learned Commissioners for Workmen Compensation in the State are directed to follow the following broad guidelines (I) Learned Commissioners for Workmen Compensation should pronounce the order in presence of the concerned claimant/s and inform the claimant/s the amount of compensation awarded inclusive of interest and penalty. The learned Commissioners for Workmen Compensation also shall apprise/inform the respective claimant/s what amount they will get inclusive of the amount of compensation, penalty and interest. As and when the Insurance Company/contractor/employer deposits the amount as per the order in respective Claim Application/s, the respective claimant's must be informed/apprised of the total amount deposited by the Insurance Company/employer/contractor. (II) The Claims Tribunal should, in the case of minors, invariably order the amount of compensation awarded to the minor invested in long term fixed deposits at least till the date of the minor attaining majority. The interest on the said Fixed Deposits shall be permitted to be withdrawn by the guardian or next friend to meet with expenses for better welfare of minor. In case of other claimants, the learned Commissioner for Workmen Compensation shall order for deposit of at least 85% amount of compensation awarded (inclusive of penalty and interest) in long-term Fixed Deposits in any Nationalised Bank and as far as possible in State Bank of India with a provision that the claimant/s shall be entitled to a periodical monthly/quarterly interests on such Fixed Deposit. However, in an appropriate case may even pass the order for deposit of even 100% amount of compensation in long term Fixed Deposit with a provision for periodical interest. However, in an appropriate case may even pass the order for deposit of even 100% amount of compensation in long term Fixed Deposit with a provision for periodical interest. (III) In personal injury cases, if further treatment is necessary, the Commissioner/s, on being satisfied about the same, which shall be recorded in writing, permit withdrawal of such amount as is necessary for incurring expenses for such treatment (IV) In all cases in which investment in long term Fixed Deposit is made, it should be on condition that the Bank shall not permit any loan or advance on the Fixed Deposits and interest on the amount invested is paid monthly/quarterly, directly to the claimant or his guardian as the case may be. (V) In all cases, the Commissioner should grant to the claimants, liberty to apply for withdrawal in case of emergency. To meet with such a contingency, if the amount awarded/deposited is substantial, the Claims Tribunal may invest it in more than one Fixed Deposit so that if need be one such F.D.R., can be liquidated. While granting such permission, the learned Commissioners shall pass a speaking and reasoned order justifying withdrawal of such amount. (VI) All the learned Commissioners are directed to incorporate the above conditions while disposing of the Claim Applications and also at the time of disbursement of amount/s deposited by the Insurance Company/contractor, employer and must inform/apprise the respective claimants accordingly. (VII) These guidelines are not exhaustive but merely illustrative. The aforesaid guidelines are to be followed and complied with invariably in all cases in which compensation is awarded under the provisions of the Workmen Compensation Act, whether by way of adjudication or agreement between the parties, and all the Courts/Commissioners must apply these guidelines. 7. While parting with this order, it is hoped that the learned Commissioners under the Workmen's Compensation Act shall realise their duties toward the victims of the accident so that large part of compensation amount is not lost to them and that the very purpose of laying down the guidelines is to ensure the safety of the amount so that the claimants do not become victims of unscrupulous persons and unethical agreements or arrangements. With this hope, all these applications are disposed of. With this hope, all these applications are disposed of. The ad-interim relief granted in each of the applications is made absolute till final hearing of the main First Appeals with a further modification that the amount already withdrawn by the respective-claimants shall be subject to ultimate outcome of the main First Appeals, and that the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation is further directed not to allow the original-claimants to withdraw any amount from the Fixed Deposits, and that there shall not be any loan and/or advance on such Fixed Deposits, without prior permission of this Court. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent in each of the applications. However, there shall be no order as to costs. The Registry shall keep a copy of this order in each of the applications. 8. A copy of this order may also be placed before the Honourable the Chief Justice for his direction to circulate the same to all the Commissioners for Workmen's Compensation in the State of Gujarat. Order accordingly.