Follow TNM's WhatsApp channel for news updates and story links.
The Supreme Court of India has upheld a four-week ban on collecting toll at Paliyekkara on the National Highway 544, directed by the Kerala High Court.
Dismissing the plea by the National Highway Authority (NHAI) against the order suspending the toll collection at Paliyekkara toll plaza due to the bad condition of the Edappally-Mannuthy stretch, the SC stated that travellers cannot be compelled to pay tolls if the condition of the highway is poor.
Due to ongoing construction of underpasses and flyovers on NH-554, there is significant traffic congestion, especially between Mannuthy and Angamaly in Thrissur. Commuters have been complaining about long delays and terrible road conditions for the past few weeks. The SC also criticised the NHAI for the poor condition of the road.
The SC bench comprising Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran noted that the citizen who pays the toll has the right to demand well-maintained roads, and if the NHAI cannot facilitate them, they cannot demand toll.
“The obligation of the public to pay a user fee under statutory provisions is premised on the assurance that their use of the road will be free from hindrances. When the public is legally bound to pay a user fee, they simultaneously acquire a corresponding right to demand unhindered, safe, and regulated access to the road. Any failure on the part of the National Highways Authority or its agents to ensure such access constitutes a breach of the public’s legitimate expectations and undermines the very basis of the toll regime,” the court said.
An appeal by Guruvayoor Infrastructure Ltd, the concessionaire who is collecting the toll, was also dismissed.
The court also observed that people who pay motor vehicle tax for plying vehicles on roads are forced to pay tolls on highways. “The poor citizen is bound to wait for hours, in a queue and in a cramped space, with the engine running but hardly moving, is a tragedy. That the toll is really on the purse and the patience of the citizen, as also the environment, is the downside,” the court said.