However, after the judgment, a technical question arose: Does this apply to a family whose breadwinner died in 2022 but who hasn't received a single penny yet? Or are they stuck with the old ₹10 lakh rate because the death happened before the "new rule" was written?

The National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) approached the Supreme Court seeking clarity on this very issue. NALSA pointed out that the lack of a clear timeline was causing confusion. For instance:

The Madras High Court had, in one instance, stuck to the older rate of ₹10 lakhs for a past death.
Conversely, the Delhi High Court had already started applying the enhanced ₹30 lakh rate.

NALSA presented the Supreme Court with two possible ways to look at the situation:

Interpretation A: If a death occurred before October 20, 2023, and the family was already paid ₹10 lakhs, they should now be entitled to an additional ₹20 lakhs to match the new standard.
Interpretation B: If the death occurred before the judgment and the money was already paid, the case is closed. However, if the death happened in the past and the government is yet to pay, they must pay the higher amount of ₹30 lakhs.

A bench comprising Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice PB Varale heard the matter and passed an order on January 20, providing a definitive two-pronged rule:

Cases Already Settled will Not be Reopened: If the authorities have already determined the compensation and the payment has reached the family before the clarification, those cases will not be reopened. In these instances, the families cannot claim the additional ₹20 lakhs.
Unpaid/Pending Cases Must Get ₹30 Lakhs: In cases where the death occurred prior to the October 2023 judgment, but the compensation process was either stuck in red tape or simply not initiated, the authorities are now legally bound to pay the updated amount of ₹30 lakhs.

This is a massive relief for hundreds of families who have been fighting long-drawn battles in courts or government offices for years. The Court’s logic is that since the "right" to compensation is being exercised now, it must reflect the "current" value of that right as decided by the apex court.

The urgency of this clarification was highlighted by a specific writ petition filed by a woman named Asha. Asha’s husband was a sewer cleaner who died on July 1, 2022—more than a year before the Balram Singh judgment—after inhaling toxic gases while cleaning a septic tank.

Despite the National Commission for Safai Karamcharies passing an order in August 2023 (two months before the SC judgment) recommending compensation, Asha had received nothing. She argued that since her compensation was still "unpaid," she should be entitled to the ₹30 lakh amount rather than the ₹10 lakh amount that existed at the time of her husband’s death.

The Supreme Court directed that her case be placed before the Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders, signaling that her plea for the higher amount carries significant weight under the new clarification.

Beyond the money, the Supreme Court expressed deep disappointment regarding the administrative side of the issue. The Court noted that the National Commission for Safai Karamcharis (NCSK) has several vacant positions that have not been filled for a long time.