Supreme Court Upholds Kerala High Court's Toll Suspension at Paliyekkara Plaza in Thrissur

The Supreme Court has upheld the Kerala High Court's order suspending toll collection at Paliyekkara plaza for four weeks, emphasising citizens' rights and public convenience over commercial interests.

The Supreme Court has rejected the appeals of the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) and the operator of the Paliyekkara toll plaza in Thrissur. This decision upholds a Kerala High Court order that halted toll collection for four weeks. The court emphasised that citizens should not pay extra for roads they have already funded through taxes.

The apex court's decision, shared on Tuesday, highlighted the need to prioritise citizen welfare over commercial interests. This is especially true when public inconvenience arises from administrative failures and poor road conditions. The bench, led by Chief Justice B R Gavai, stated that citizens should travel freely on roads without additional tolls, given the existing taxes they pay.

Supreme Court's Stance on Toll Collection

The Supreme Court agreed with the Kerala High Court's observations. It noted that citizens' obligation to pay tolls is based on the promise of unobstructed and safe road access. If NHAI or its agents fail to provide this, it breaches public trust and undermines the toll system's foundation.

The Supreme Court had reserved its decision on Monday regarding NHAI's plea against the high court's suspension of toll collection at Paliyekkara. Chief Justice Gavai remarked that despite numerous complaints, there was no positive response, leading to the high court's order.

Concerns Over Road Conditions and Toll Practices

The court criticised the Build Operate and Transfer (BOT) contracts, which allow cost recovery from users despite them paying motor vehicle taxes. It highlighted issues like excessive profits by successful bidders and road deterioration due to neglect and natural factors.

The high court pointed out problems such as understaffed toll booths causing delays and environmental harm from idling vehicles. It described these issues as burdensome for citizens both financially and in terms of patience.

Monitoring Traffic Flow and Maintenance Work

The Supreme Court saw no reason to interfere with the high court's interim order. It expressed concern for citizens' struggles, environmental impact, and fuel wastage. The bench supported maintaining the order and requested monitoring of traffic conditions by a Division Bench.

Additionally, it urged involving M/s. PST Engineering and Constructions, Namakkal, responsible for addressing road black spots. The court did not consider reducing tolls but noted NHAI's assurance of ongoing maintenance work to improve traffic flow.

Future Actions and Responsibilities

Once traffic conditions improve, NHAI or the concessionaire can request lifting the toll suspension before the four-week period ends. The concessionaire may also seek compensation or an extension of their operational period with or without maintenance duties.

Previously, the Supreme Court questioned why commuters should pay Rs 150 if it took 12 hours to travel a 65-kilometre stretch in Thrissur. The Kerala High Court ordered toll suspension on August 6 due to poor road conditions and severe congestion on National Highway 544.

The high court emphasised that charging motorists under such circumstances breached public trust between NHAI and citizens. It stressed that smooth traffic flow is essential for maintaining this trust.

With inputs from PTI