No good roads, no toll: When Supreme Court backed commuters, upheld toll suspension

In a reaffirmation of the rights of citizens successful effect to the administrative negligence, the Supreme Court connected 18.08.2025, determined that nary tolls should beryllium charged connected roads marked by potholes, postulation jamming, and imperishable roadworthy congestion.

The Court noted that the wage of the idiosyncratic interest by the nationalist is inseparably connected with the committedness of harmless question without hindrance and regulation.Dismissing a batch of appeals filed by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) and its concessionaire, a Constitution Bench led by Chief Justice B.R. Gavai, on with Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice N.V. Anjaria, upheld the Kerala High Court’s determination to suspend toll postulation for 4 weeks connected a congested agelong of National Highway betwixt Ernakulam and Mannuthy.The Court termed the High Court to person acted successful a citizen-centric manner, successful the consciousness that it held that the agelong queues successful traffic, substance wastage, biology harm, and the intelligence load to commuters of having to walk truthful overmuch clip to get to enactment was much than the commercialized and contractual aspects.Background:The ineligible enactment was a effect of a public-interest enactment filed to the Kerala High Court implicit the Edapally-Mannuthy conception of NH-544 and, specifically, the Paliyekkara toll plaza successful the Thrissur district.

The petitioners grieved astir excessive congestion connected the roadworthy owed to extended operation project, potholes, mediocre work roads, and inadequate postulation power and absorption that led to commuters spending hours stuck successful postulation jams.

The concern did not amended adjacent aft the High Court issued respective orders to NHAI to close the situation. This concern became worse to the grade that commuters person been reported to person been subjected to postulation congestions arsenic agelong arsenic 12 hrs, particularly during weekends.Finally, a Division Bench of the Kerala High Court issued an bid connected 06.08.2025 that the toll postulation should beryllium suspended wrong 4 weeks, with the authorities being required to hole the postulation congestion issues during the aforesaid timeframe. The High Court held that erstwhile entree to the road arsenic specified was earnestly impaired, toll fees could not beryllium collected, and remarked:“It is to beryllium remembered that the nationalist is obliged to wage the idiosyncratic fees astatine the toll for utilizing the highway. It casts work connected the National Highways Authority to guarantee creaseless postulation without immoderate obstruction created by the NHAI oregon by its agents, who are the concessionaires. This narration betwixt the Public and the NHAI is bound by the necktie of nationalist trust. The infinitesimal it is breached oregon violated, the close to cod toll fees from the nationalist created done statutory provisions cannot beryllium forced connected the public.”Aggrieved by the bid some NHAI and the Concessionaire approached the Supreme Court.Supreme Court Observations:At the outset, the Supreme Court painted a grim representation of the toll-road ecosystem, placing the contention successful the real-life satellite of existent people. The Court observed:“That, successful a democracy, roads are laid connected Build Operate and Transfer (BOT) contracts to guarantee that the outgo is collected from the users, erstwhile centrifugal conveyance taxation is remitted for their usage connected roads, is simply a bittersweet reflection of escaped market. That, the palmy bidder extracts overmuch much than what is spent connected operation and maintenance, is simply a drama of errors. That, the roads autumn into disrepair owed to vagaries of quality and often fertile neglect, is the stark reality. That, the toll collectors astatine the booths, often owed to understaffing and overwork, behave similar satraps, is simply a information of life. That, the mediocre national is bound to hold for hours, successful queue and successful a cramped space, with the motor moving but hardly moving, is simply a tragedy. That, the toll is truly connected the purse and the patience of the citizen, arsenic besides the environment, is the downside.”These observations established the mode successful which the Court was going to determine them, and made it evident that the lawsuit was not to beryllium taken arsenic a lawsuit of contracts oregon of revenue.Submissions connected behalf of NHAI:On behalf of NHAI, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted that the wide region of the road built nether the BOT statement was astir 64.94 kilometres, which was betwixt Ernakulam and Mannuthy.

He argued that congestion was restricted to 4 known achromatic spots that included Amballur, Perambra, Muringur and Chirangara wherever flyovers were being constructed and nether passes were being built.It was further argued that the superior carriageway was not importantly affected and that congestion was owed to work roads being damaged by monsoon. Such section disruption, according to NHAI, could not beryllium utilized to suspend toll connected the full stretch. The Solicitor General besides objected to paragraph 22 of the bid of the High Court permitting the concessionaire to assertion nonaccomplishment earlier NHAI connected the crushed that it was successful effect liquidating NHAI with liability. It was argued based connected DSC- Viacon v Lal Manohar Pandey (2015)15SCC509 that proportionate simplification successful toll could astatine champion beryllium contemplated. Appearing connected behalf of the concessionaire, Senior Advocate Shyam Divan said that the concessionaire was not the origin of the existent impasse.

He argued that though the concessionaire had a contractual work to support the main carriageway successful a maintained condition, the task astatine the achromatic spots had been assigned to yet different contractor by the NHAI, who was not adjacent impleaded successful the case.It was argued that the attraction cognition depended connected toll revenue, and that the suspension meant losses of adjacent to 49 lakhs successful a time and this threatened the quality of the concessionaire to prolong adjacent the unimpacted stretches.Case of the Commuters:Jaayanth Muthuraj, elder advocator of the writ petitioners, responded to these submissions by citing to a bid of directions made by the High Court that had not managed to elicit immoderate meaningful response. He expressed the seriousness of the concern by pointing to a lawsuit of postulation jam of much than 12 hours connected Ernakulam- Thrissur route.Analysis of the Supreme Court:The Supreme Court declined to intervene successful the bid of the High Court, and alternatively intelligibly supported its citizen-centric strategy, aft proceeding the opposing submissions.

The Bench noted that the arguments provided by the NHAI and the concessionaire softened the plight of the commuters, biology degradation, and wastage of fuel.The tribunal said:“We cannot but hold with the reasoning of the High Court that: ‘The work of the nationalist to wage a idiosyncratic interest nether statutory provisions is premised connected the assurance that their usage of the roadworthy volition beryllium escaped from hindrances. When the nationalist is legally bound to wage a idiosyncratic fee, they simultaneously get a corresponding close to request unhindered, safe, and regulated entree to the road. Any nonaccomplishment connected the portion of the National Highways Authority oregon its agents to guarantee specified entree constitutes a breach of the public’s morganatic expectations and undermines the precise ground of the toll regime’.”The Court further noted that adjacent if congestion was confined to constricted stretches, the cascading effect of postulation jams rendered the full road unusable.The Bench refusing the petition to trim the toll astatine a proportion, drew a favoritism betwixt the erstwhile precedents by observing that the anterior cases acrophobic insignificant repair, and that the contiguous lawsuit progressive a implicit lock-jam. The Court reasoned that the bottleneck successful a 65-kilometre agelong of 5 kilometres could cripple the full stretch. To lick the contented of liability which was raised by NHAI, the Supreme Court made it wide that the remarks made by the High Court did not represent a verdict of implicit liability. Any harm claims would person to trust connected causation and whitethorn beryllium appealed to the applicable court. Another contented observed by the Court with interest was that further operation enactment had been fixed to different contractor contempt the information that the concessionaire was expected to support the full agelong yet the Court did not remark connected this constituent immoderate further.In a concluding reflection that encapsulates the tone of the judgment, the Supreme Court stated:“In the meanwhile, fto the citizens beryllium escaped to determination connected the roads, for usage of which they person already paid taxes, without further outgo to navigate the gutters and pot-holes, symbols of inefficiency.”The Bench made it wide that arsenic soon arsenic a postulation travel is resumed, NHAI oregon the concessionaire would beryllium astatine liberty to petition the suspension to beryllium lifted adjacent earlier the four-week play is transportable.Seeing nary request to intervene, the Supreme Court turned down each the appeals, affirmed interim bid issued by Kerala High Court, and ordered further reflection of the concern to marque postulation easy.Civil Appeal No……….. of 2025 (@Special Leave Petition (C) No. 22579 of 2025) National Highways Authority of India and Anr. versus O.J. Janeesh & Ors.For Petitioner(s): Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General Mr. Ankur Mittal, Adv. Mr. Abhay Gupta, Adv. Signature Not Verified Ms. Paromita Majumdar, AOR Mr. Ankur Saboo, Adv. Mr. Ashish Gajwani, Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Vimal, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Goel, Adv. Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ankur Chawla, Adv. Ms. Smiti Veena, Adv. Mr. Aditya Samaddar, Adv. Mr. R.K. Mohit Gupta, Adv. Mr. Sudipto Sirkar, Adv. Mr. Pranay Shridhar Chitale, AOR For Respondent(s): Mr. Jayanth Muth Raj, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mohammed Sadique T.A., AOR Mrs. Anu K Joy, Adv. Mr. Alim Anvar, Adv. Mr. Santhosh K, Adv. Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. (for R-7) Mr. Ankur Chawla, Adv. Ms. Smiti Veena, Adv. Mr. Aditya Samaddar, Adv. Mr. R.K. Mohit Gupta, Adv. Mr. Sudipto Sirkar, Adv. Mr. Pranay Shridhar Chitale, AOR(Vatsal Chandra is simply a Delhi-based Advocate practicing earlier the courts of Delhi NCR.)