Judgment :- 1. This Court passed the following orders when the matter was moved on 16.3.2015: Paragraphs 1 to 7 of the order is usefully extracted as follows: “The appeal has been preferred by the Tamil Nadu Transport Corporation, Kancheepuram Division-1 against the award of Rs.7,30,200/- for the death of one Prabakaran in the accident occurred on 10.3.2008, when he was riding his bicycle, which was hit by the Transport Corporation bus. Therefore, the claim petition. On contest, the Tribunal found that the Transport Corporation bus was driven rash and negligently and awarded a sum of Rs.7,30,200/- on 27.11.2013. The said award is proposed to be challenged in the appeal. There is a delay of 21 days in filing the appeal and therefore, the condone delay petition was taken and the same was ordered. Therefore, appeal was numbered. 2. It is seen that a number of appeals are being filed by the Transport Corporations with delay and without even depositing the amount before the Tribunal. Even after confirmation of awards by this Court, a number of awards are not being complied leaving the victims of road accident in lurch. Therefore, the Courts are left with no other go except to attach the Transport Corporation Buses. The attachment of Transport Corporation buses creates problems to the travelling public, especially poor people from villages. 3. It is also seen from the news paper reports that many buses are being attached for non compliance of awarded passed by the Tribunal. This Court is unable to understand as to why award amounts are not deposited into Court in time to avoid attachment. Both the claimants as well as Travelling Public are put to unnecessary hardship because of the attitude of the Transport Corporation Officials. It is also said that due to financial crunch the amounts are not paid. 4. In view of the above position, this Court suo-motu impleaded the Secretary to Government, Transport Department, State of Tamil Nadu, Fort St. George, Chennai as third respondent and Mr. Venugopal, learned Special Government Pleader (CS) took notice on behalf of the third respondent. The following queries were raised to be answered by the Transport Secretary. 1) How many buses have been attached so far pursuant to the attachment order passed by the Courts? 2) How many accidents occurred due to involvement of Transport Corporation buses for the past 10 years in Tamil Nadu? The following queries were raised to be answered by the Transport Secretary. 1) How many buses have been attached so far pursuant to the attachment order passed by the Courts? 2) How many accidents occurred due to involvement of Transport Corporation buses for the past 10 years in Tamil Nadu? (Year wise, Corporation wise details are to be given). 3) How many MACTOPs were filed against each Transport Corporation for the past 10 years (year wise and Corporation wise details are to be given)? 4) How many awards have been passed so far against the Corporation for the past 10 years? (year wise and Transport Corporation wise details have to be given) 5) How many Execution Petitions are pending against each Transport Corporation in Tamil Nadu? 6) How much award amount is due in respect of claims in MACTOPs against each Transport Corporation? (Year wise and each Transport Corporation wise details have to be given) 7) What is the amounts to be spent every year, if the Transport Buses have to be insured? 8) Whether the amount of yearly premium to be paid in cases of taking insurance, would be more than the MACTOP award amounts being paid for the yearly claims by the Transport Corporation? 9) Are the Transport Corporations are running in loss as many awards are not satisfied even after many years? If so given the details of loss and profit for the past 10 years. (Year wise and Corporation wise are to be given) 10) What are all the steps taken to improve the situation in the Corporation?” 2. Further the following queries were raised to be answered by the authorities: i) How much, every year to every Corporation, the Government has to pay regarding the concession given to the students, elderly person and the Government Servants, who are on official duty. ii) How much subsidy is being paid by the Government every year for the past 10 years? iii) What are all the reasons for consistent loss suffered by the Transport Corporation for the past 10 years, as the statement filed before this Court reveals loss is every year in respect of every Corporation for the past 10 years? 3. ii) How much subsidy is being paid by the Government every year for the past 10 years? iii) What are all the reasons for consistent loss suffered by the Transport Corporation for the past 10 years, as the statement filed before this Court reveals loss is every year in respect of every Corporation for the past 10 years? 3. Subsequently, the Senior Manager, Transport Corporation, Chairman’s Office, who was present before this Court, submitted that the Insurance Companies are not coming forward to insure the Government vehicles as they are exempted from the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act. Therefore, this Court suo motu impleaded the Insurance Regulatory Development Authority represented by its Chairman cum Managing Director, Hyderabad, as the 4th respondent and Mr. M.I. Raghavan, learned counsel took notice on behalf of the IRDA and he was asked to get instructions as to whether it is a fact that the Insurance Companies are refusing to insure the Government Vehicles and whether the Insurance Companies are ready to insure the Government vehicles as what have been done in the States of Kerala and Karnataka. 4. On 18.3.2015, the Additional Chief Secretary to Transport Corporation was present. The following order was passed on 18.3.2015. Paragraph-2 of the order dated 18.3.2015 reads as follows: “2. The respondent is also directed to State as to whether Corpus for the Transport Corporation has been created as per Section 146(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988. It is mandatory for the Transport Corporation to create a Corpus, otherwise, they cannot enjoy the Government exemption given under Section 146(3) of the M.V. Act. By not creating a Transport Corporation Corpus for satisfying the third party claims, many buses are being attached. Only in those circumstances, this Court asked the Government why the respondent/Transport Corporation buses were not insured.” 5. The answers were given by way of reply statement by Transport Department and the matters are being heard. When the matter is called today, it is brought to the notice of this Court that 710, Transport Corporation buses were attached pursuant to the attachment order passed by the MACT Tribunal and they are kept idle in Court custody for a long time. Thereafter, steps were taken by the respective Transport Corporations to release the vehicles. Out of 710 vehicles, 507 vehicles are still in the custody of the Court. Thereafter, steps were taken by the respective Transport Corporations to release the vehicles. Out of 710 vehicles, 507 vehicles are still in the custody of the Court. It is represented that per day about 600 people are using every Transport Corporation bus and because of the attachment of the Transport Corporation vehicles, travelling of public is put to unnecessary hardship. Neither the victims get money, nor the transport corporations are able to run the vehicles or the public is benefits due to attachment of vehicles. 6. Considering the need to operate more buses during the summer vacation and the convenience of the travelling passengers, it is appropriate to forthwith release all the vehicles belonging to the respective Transport Corporations, which have been attached and kept in the custody of the Court as stated in the annexure. The attached vehicles are directed to be released forthwith on condition that the Transport Corporations shall first deposit 25% of the respective compensation amounts in the respective courts on or before 15.6.2015. The balance amounts of 75% has to be deposited before the respective Tribunals in the following ratio i.e. 25% on or before 15.7.2015, another 25% on or before 15.8.2015 and the last installment of 25% on or before 15.9.2015. Apart from the vehicles mentioned in the annexures, the following two vehicles are also ordered to be released forthwith in the above manner. 1. Vehicle NO. TN68/NO433, 2012 attached by MACT, Thanjavur in MCOP.No. 139of 2008 by order dated 28.4.2015. 2. Vehicle No. TN68/NO455, 2012 attached by MACT, Thanjavur in MCOP.No. 197 of 2011 by order dated 28.4.2015. 7. By granting release of the vehicles on condition to deposit as stated above, no prejudice is caused to the claimants, as the award amount is directed to be deposited in the Court. This Court is aware of the fact that even the awards which were passed 5 to 10 years, ago, are not satisfied by the Transport Corporations. This order is passed to benefit both the claimants and the Transport Corporations. Claimants can be informed about this order. 8. To verify whether the first instalment of 25% has been deposited or not, call the matter on 17.6.2015, failing which, respective Chairman-cum-Managing Director of the Transport Corporations and the Financial Advisor-cum-Chief Accountant Officer of the Transport Corporations, apart from Additional Chief Secretary of Transport Department shall appear before this Court on that day. 8. To verify whether the first instalment of 25% has been deposited or not, call the matter on 17.6.2015, failing which, respective Chairman-cum-Managing Director of the Transport Corporations and the Financial Advisor-cum-Chief Accountant Officer of the Transport Corporations, apart from Additional Chief Secretary of Transport Department shall appear before this Court on that day. Due to paucity of time, the Registry is directed to send the copy of order to the respective Tribunals as noted in the Tabular Columns, so as to enable respective Tribunals, to release the vehicles immediately. If required, the Tribunal should have sitting on Saturday (2.5.2015) also to release the attached vehicles. 9. Call on 17.6.2015.