A Bench of the Supreme Court comprising of Justice KM Joseph and Justice S Ravindra Bhat has in the case of National Highways Authority of India & Others v. Madhukar Kumar & Others, in the exercise of its civil appellate jurisdiction, set aside a Patna High Court judgment which directed the National Highway Authority of India to shift the toll plaza on Patna-Bakhtiyarpur four-lane road (NH-30) from Karmalichak near Deedarganj.
“Undoubtedly, in India, every state action must be fair, failing which, it will fall foul of the mandate of Article 14. It is, at this juncture, we may also notice that the duty to give reasons, would arise even in the case of administrative action, where legal rights are at stake and the administrative action adversely affects legal rights.”
The Patna High Court, while allowing the writ petitions challenging the setting up of Toll Plaza, had held that the toll plaza location was a violation of Rule 8 of National Highways Fee (Determination of Rates and Collection) Rules, 2008 which provides that a toll plaza must be constructed beyond 10 kilometers of a municipal or town area and, in no condition, should be within five-kilometer limits.
Held
“The upshot of the above discussion is that we find as follows:
(1) The construction of the toll plaza at 194 kilometre was not illegal or arbitrary;
(2) The direction by the High Court, to shift toll plaza, cannot be upheld and it is liable to be set aside;
(3) The appellants will look at the barricades (closing of service roads) in regard to the toll plaza and permit such barricades only as are permitted in Rule 17 of the Rules. Any unauthorised barricades will be removed without any delay and at any rate within 2 weeks from today.
(4) The First Appellant will issue suitable directions to all Executive Authorities to maintain distinct records containing the decision, invoking the second proviso to Rule 8 of the Rules. Such direction shall be issued within 3 weeks from today.
(5) We direct the appellants as also the Concessionaire to extend the fullest benefits of the concessions under Rule 9 of the Rules.
(6) Resultantly, we allow the Appeal and set aside the impugned Judgment and the direction to shift the toll plaza is set aside.
(7) There shall be no order as to costs.”
Case Details
Case Name: National Highways Authority of India & Others v. Madhukar Kumar & Others
Case Number: Civil Appeal No(s). 11141 of 2018
Read Order@LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
