Supreme Court Upholds Kerala HC Toll Suspension on Edapally–Mannuthy
The Supreme Court has delivered a landmark judgment upholding a lower court’s decision to suspend toll collection on the congested Edapally-Mannuthy highway. In a ruling that prioritises public welfare over private contractual obligations, the apex court’s pronouncements underscored the imperative for road authorities to ensure unhindered and safe passage. This definitive stance signals a critical shift in the public-private partnership paradigm, holding infrastructure developers accountable to citizens, thereby fostering equitable and sustainable urban mobility.
The judicial intervention originated from a compelling citizen plea in the Kerala High Court, which sought the suspension of user fees citing severe traffic congestion due to substandard road maintenance and ongoing construction. The court’s interim order, now affirmed by the highest judicial authority, highlighted a fundamental principle: the public’s obligation to pay a toll confers upon them a corresponding right to safe, well-maintained roads. The National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) had argued that the disruptions were limited to a mere four-kilometre stretch and that halting toll collection could trigger complex contractual consequences. However, the Supreme Court astutely noted that even a localised bottleneck creates a “cascading effect,” prolonging traffic jams across the entire 65-kilometre corridor.
In its strongly worded judgment, the bench criticised the “rank neglect” of Indian roads and the irony of a free-market system that allows contractors to “extract much more than what is spent.” This commentary resonates deeply with the daily plight of millions of commuters who feel trapped in a system where they pay for efficiency but are met with frustration and delays. The ruling reinforces the profound legal precedent that the right to safe, motorable roads is an intrinsic part of the constitutional right to life, as established in a prior 2025 judgment. This focus on citizen-centric governance serves as a powerful reminder that state-sanctioned infrastructure projects must serve the people, not just profit margins.
The decision has significant implications for urban sustainability and public health. Traffic congestion not only wastes valuable human time but also results in increased fuel consumption and higher carbon emissions from idling vehicles. By penalising poor maintenance, the court’s order inadvertently supports a zero net carbon agenda by incentivising more efficient traffic flow. This alignment of judicial principles with environmental and social equity goals is a pivotal moment for urban planning. The ruling sets a clear precedent for accountability in public infrastructure projects and a pathway towards more eco-friendly and equitable cities, where every citizen can expect a safe and swift journey.
The Supreme Court, while upholding the interim order, has directed the lower court to continue monitoring the progress and has also suggested making the contractors a party to the ongoing proceedings. This ensures that those directly responsible for the poor maintenance are held accountable. The ruling sends an unmistakable message to both public and private entities: the public trust placed in them is paramount, and any failure to uphold that trust will not be tolerated.
