B.AMIT STHALEKAR,J. - (1.) Heard Sri S.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Shashi Kant Upadhyay, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents no. 1 and 2. Notice on respondent no. 3 is deemed to be sufficient in pursuance of the order of this Court dated 14.07.2017.
(2.) The allegation in the writ petition is that the respondent no. 3 filed Motor Accident Claim Petition (MACP) No. 886 of 1999 claiming that on 11.06.1999 he was travelling in Bus No. U.P. 07-4330 and on account of the negligence of the bus driver the bus overturned. It is stated that the respondent no. 3 suffered serious injuries and claimed a sum of Rs. 1,95,000/- as compensation. The case was referred to the Lok Adalat, Meerut on 19.12.1999 where a judgment was passed awarding Rs. 40,000/- by way of compensation to the respondent no. 3. When the Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as Corporation) enquired into the matter, it was found that the claimant was a fraudulent and non-existing person and that the compromise had been arrived at in the Lok Adalat through fraud and collusion of the officers of the petitioner's corporation with the claimant.
(3.) In paragraph 6 of the writ petition, it is alleged that this fact was brought to the notice of the then District Judge, Meerut by the Corporation through its letter dated 25.11.2002 and also the fact that about 18 claim petitions in connection with the same accident had been filed and in one case M.A.C.P. No. 245/2000, S.P. Tyagi v. Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation when this whole issue was highlighted, the said S.P. Tyagi withdraw the Claim Petition No. 245 of 2000.;