JUDGMENT 1. - By the instant writ petition filed under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India, order Annex. 5 dated 27.05.2008 passed by respondent Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Anoopgarh has been challenged by the petitioner. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. The facts giving rise to the instant writ petition are that a claim petition was filed by the petitioner and her minor sons and daughters claiming compensation, being legal representatives of the deceased, who had died in a road accident. The said claim case was registered as MACT Case No.66/1990 which came to be decided by judgment and award dated 20.12.1997 in favour of the present petitioner and her sons and daughters. While making order for payment of the amount of compensation awarded in favour of the petitioner and her sons and daughters, respondent Tribunal further directed to deposit certain amount in fixed deposit receipts. So far as the petitioner is concerned, she was directed to deposit a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- from the amount of award in a nationalised Bank in fixed deposit for a period of five years with the stipulation for further renewal for a period of two years. The petitioner accordingly deposited the amount in fixed deposit which was later on renewed. 4. However, the petitioner's son Gaurav intended to pursue further studies for the degree of MBA at the Conventry University in U.K. for which he made application to the said University and received communication dated 15.06.2007. In order to facilitate her son Gaurav to take up higher studies for the degree of MBA at the Conventry University (U.K.), the petitioner moved application before the respondent Tribunal seeking permission to withdraw the amount deposited by her in the fixed deposit so that necessary expenses to provide higher education to her son Gaurav could be met. Vide the order impugned Annex. 5, respondent Tribunal dismissed that application. Hence this writ petition. 5. It appears from the material available on record that the petitioner who has attained the age of 61 years and one of her daughters has also been married after the death of her husband and now she wished to provide for the higher education to her son, having no other source to meet the expenses for higher studies, she has applied for the withdrawal of her own money which is kept in fixed-deposit by the-order of the Tribunal. 6. 6. In my considered view, the Tribunal fell in error in declining to release the amount of fixed deposit which is in the name of the petitioner herself upon the contingency brought to the notice of the Tribunal. Keeping in view the status of the petitioner and her age, the fiscal background of the family and larger interest of her son to pursue higher studies for acquiring the degree of MBA from the Conventry University, U.K., in my view, it would be appropriate to allow the petitioner to withdraw the said amount of fixed deposit. 7. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed. Order impugned Annex. 5 dated 27.05.2008 is set aside and respondent No.1 is directed to release the amount of fixed deposit receipt which is deposited by the petitioner in compliance of the award dated 20.12.1997 passed by respondent No.1 in favour of the petitioner. 8. There shall however be no order as to costs.Writ Petition Allowed. *******