SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Mad) 4733

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, A.D. MARIA CLETE, JJ.
V. Balakrishnan - Petitioner 
Versus
The General Manager (T), National Highways Authority of India, Tamil Nadu Division and Ors. – Respondents
W.P.(MD) No.3996 of 2025 and W.M.P.(MD) No.2882 of 2025
Decided On : 03-06-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. S. Vanchinathan.
For the Respondents: Mr. B. Naveen Kumar for Mr. Su. Srinivasan, Standing Counsel for NHAI, Ms. Lakshmi Gopinathan for Mr. C. Sasikumar.

Maintenance of highways is a prerequisite for collecting toll fees; road users have the right to demand proper maintenance regardless of contractual relationships.

Headnote:(A) National Highways Authority of India Act, 1988 - Writ of mandamus for action against mismanagement in maintaining highways and collection of toll fees - The petitioner contended that toll fees should not be collected due to the poor condition of the highway post-termination of the contract with the fifth respondent. (Paras 1-5)

(B) Contract Law - Implied duty to maintain - National Highways Authority of India is under an obligation to maintain highways before collecting tolls, and the user has a right to demand maintenance without privity of contract. (Paras 7-8)

(C) Writ Jurisdiction - Writ petition maintainability despite pending arbitration proceedings regarding contractual obligations, emphasizing public safety and service standards. (Paras 8-9)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner seeks action against the National Highways Authority of India for failure to maintain the Madurai-Tuticorin National Highways post-termination of the maintenance contract with the fifth respondent and claims toll fees should not be collected due to highway disrepair.

Findings of Court:
The court directed the National Highways Authority of India to refrain from collecting toll fees until the highway is maintained to the prescribed standards.

Issues: The court addressed whether the National Highways Authority of India can collect toll fees despite inadequate highway maintenance and the implications of the petitioner not having privity of contract.

Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that maintenance of the highway is a prerequisite for toll collection, and the petitioner, as a user, is entitled to a safe highway without necessarily being privy to the underlying contracts.

Result: Writ petition allowed.

Table of Content
1. mandamus for highway maintenance and tree planting. (Para 1)
2. claims of maintenance failure and toll fee collection. (Para 2 , 4 , 6)
3. court's reasoning on maintenance obligations. (Para 3 , 5 , 8)
4. the petitioner’s standing in the writ petition is justified despite caps on contractual obligations. (Para 7)
5. order against toll fee collection until maintenance. (Para 9)
6. petition allowed; compliance reporting required. (Para 10 , 11)

ORDER :

[S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.]

This writ petition has been filed for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 4 to take necessary action against the fifth respondent officials for mismanagement in allocating funds for planting saplings in Madurai-Tuticorin National Highways-NH-38 based on the Termination Agreement dated 20.06.2022, issued by the first respondent and further to plant road side trees on both sides and median on Madurai- Tuticorin National Highways-NH-38 based on the petitioner's representation dated 29.10.2024.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the contract between the National Highways Authority of India and the fifth respondent for maintaining the Madurai-Tuticorin National Highways came to be terminated on 17.03.2023 on the finding that the fifth respondent failed to maintain the highway as per the standards prescribed by the National Highways Authority of India.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner drew the attention of this Court with regard to the letter sent from the Regional Officer, National Highways Authority of India, Madurai to the fifth respondent, dated 18.01.2022. Paragraph No.16 of the said letter is extracted hereunder:

“16.Whereas, Concessionaire has flouted its maintenance obligations as stipulated under Clause 18.1 of the Concession Agreement. The maintenance work of highways is being neglected, which has been brought to the notice of the Concessionaire by NHAI/IE through various communications, clearly stating that the highway has become unworthy for travelling. Not only travelling on the Project Highway has become inconvenient, the public using the highway is facing grave risk of life and property while travelling on the Project Highway solely due to the acts and omissions of the Concessionaire. The attention of the Concesionaire has been drawn to the above matter time and again, however, in continuation of its complete disgard to its obligations under the Concession Agreement, the Concessionaire has failed to take any remedial actions. And due to such continued failure of the Concessionaire, the Authority was exposed to severe criticism by the road users, the State Administration and the Authorities.”

4. Relating to the above findings of the National Highways Authority of India, the petitioner would contend that the National Highways Authority of India cannot collect toll fee from the road users till such time the highway is maintained as per the standards prescribed under the National Highways Authority of India Act, 1988 and the Rules and Schemes framed thereunder.

5. Admittedly, the Madurai – Tuticorin National Highways remains in a bad condition and the said fact is not disputed by the National Highways Authority of India. However, no action was taken to maintain the highway properly. When the contract was terminated by the National Highways Authority of India on the ground that the fifth respondent failed to maintain the highway properly, then the National Highways Authority of India cannot collect toll fee from the road users without maintaining the highway properly.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that even now toll fee is being collected by the National Highways Authority of India from the road users, who are travelling from Madurai to Tuticorin or from Tuticorin to Madurai.

7. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the National Highways Authority of India would rely on the counter affidavit and state that the relief sought for in the present writ petition is contractual in natur

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top