Kerala HC Halts Toll Reinstatement on NH-544 After Service Road Collapse, Citing Public Safety Concerns

Thrissur, Kerala – In an unexpected development, the Kerala High Court on Monday deferred its anticipated order to lift the suspension of toll collection at the contentious Paliyekkara Toll Plaza on National Highway 544. The Division Bench, which had previously indicated its intent to reinstate the toll, reversed its course following reports of a newly collapsed service road, raising fresh questions about the quality and durability of repair works undertaken by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI).

The Bench, comprising Justice A Muhammed Mustaque and Justice Harisankar V Menon, is presiding over a series of writ petitions, spearheaded by Shaji J Kodankadath v. Union of India (WP(C) 20253/2021), addressing severe traffic congestion and poor road conditions along the crucial Mannuthy–Edappally stretch. The court's decision underscores its continuing judicial oversight in matters of public infrastructure and safety, prioritizing citizen welfare over commercial operations.

A Last-Minute Reversal

The court was expected to pass an order lifting the months-long suspension, a move prompted by a recent report from the court-appointed Interim Traffic Management Committee which had expressed satisfaction with the NHAI's compliance and repair efforts. However, the proceedings took a sharp turn when the Bench was apprised of the collapse of a service road at Muringoor, a section that had reportedly been re-tarred just one week prior.

In its observation, the Bench articulated the reason for its change of stance:

"Today we proposed to pass an order after verifying the report of the interim Management committee. We are deferring passing order in view of intervening factors reporting that Murungoor service road has collapsed which was tarred one week ago."

This development effectively pushes the pause button on the resumption of toll collection, which has been suspended since the High Court's initial order on August 6, 2025. That order, which was subsequently affirmed by the Supreme Court on August 18, 2025, has been extended multiple times due to persistent concerns over road safety and traffic management.

Following the report of the road collapse, the court directed the NHAI to immediately submit a detailed report on the incident to the District Collector, indicating that any further decision on the toll is contingent upon a thorough assessment of this new structural failure.

Background: A Case of Judicial Intervention in Public Infrastructure

The litigation surrounding the Paliyekkara Toll Plaza is a significant case study in the exercise of writ jurisdiction to hold public authorities accountable. The petitions were originally filed by commuters and public-spirited individuals highlighting the chaotic traffic conditions and dilapidated state of NH-544, one of Kerala's most vital economic corridors. The petitioners argued that levying a toll for a substandard and congested highway was arbitrary and unjust.

In response to the petitions, the High Court took the decisive step of suspending toll collection, linking its reinstatement directly to the completion of necessary repairs and the implementation of an effective traffic management plan. To ensure compliance and provide expert guidance, the court constituted an Interim Traffic Management Committee. This committee was tasked with a dual mandate: 1. Devising an interim traffic management plan for the congested stretch. 2. Conducting inspections and reporting on the progress and quality of the NHAI's repair work.

Initial reports from the committee were critical, pointing out issues such as uneven road surfaces and incomplete culvert works. This led the court to issue stern directives to the NHAI, demanding a compliance report be submitted to both the District Collector and the Interim Committee. While the committee’s subsequent report noted satisfactory progress—paving the way for today's expected lifting of the suspension—the Muringoor service road collapse has now cast a serious shadow over the veracity and long-term viability of the repairs.

Legal Implications and Analysis

This case has several important legal and procedural implications for practitioners in administrative, constitutional, and infrastructure law:

• Judicial Activism and Continuing Mandamus: The court's approach exemplifies a robust form of judicial oversight. Rather than issuing a one-time order, the Bench has employed a de facto continuing mandamus, retaining jurisdiction over the matter and actively monitoring the executive agency's (NHAI) performance. The deferral, based on a new factual development, reinforces the court's commitment to ensuring its orders result in tangible public benefit, not just procedural compliance.

• Balancing of Rights: The proceedings navigate the complex balance between the concessionaire's contractual right to collect tolls and the public's fundamental right to safe and usable infrastructure, which can be linked to the Right to Life under Article 21 of the Constitution. The court's actions suggest that the latter right takes precedence, especially when there is clear evidence of risk to public safety.

• Accountability of Public Authorities: The case serves as a powerful reminder that statutory bodies like the NHAI are not immune from judicial scrutiny. The court's insistence on detailed reports, compliance verification through a neutral committee, and its willingness to extend the toll suspension demonstrate a clear intent to enforce accountability. The collapse of a recently repaired road will likely lead to even more stringent scrutiny of the NHAI's methods, quality control, and contractor oversight.

For legal professionals, the court's handling of the matter provides a blueprint for public interest litigations targeting infrastructural deficiencies. It highlights the importance of presenting concrete evidence of public hardship and safety risks, and it shows the potential for courts to fashion unconventional, ongoing remedies to address systemic problems.

What Lies Ahead?

The future of toll collection at Paliyekkara now hinges on the NHAI's report regarding the Muringoor service road collapse. The court will likely scrutinize this report for not only the immediate cause of the failure but also for what it reveals about the overall quality of the repair work conducted along the entire stretch.

Legal counsel for the petitioners may argue that this incident is symptomatic of a larger problem of superficial or substandard repairs, warranting a comprehensive, independent technical audit before any consideration of reinstating the toll. Conversely, the NHAI and the toll operator will be under immense pressure to provide a convincing explanation and a swift, durable solution to restore the court's confidence.

Until then, the toll booths at Paliyekkara will remain inactive, a visible symbol of the judiciary's ongoing role as a guardian of public interest against the backdrop of crumbling infrastructure.