Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The interim orders were passed on two writ petitions filed on behalf of the clients challenging certain coercive actions initiated by National Highways Authority of India and Ministry of Road Transport and Highways with regard to an alleged incident on a National Highway section.
The Court remarked that it was one of those cases where the authority instead of carrying out its own obligations, kept on tightening the screw upon the contractor to finish the work within the extended timeline.
The Court held that landowners are entitled to compensation for land acquired for a service road in a National Highway widening project and directed payment of the compensation amount, holding the denial of compensation for such land to be arbitrary.
“Transfer of toll collection rights through competitive bidding for commercial consideration is manifestly a business activity and not an inalienable sovereign function. Sovereign functions are those which can only be performed by the State, such as defence, legislation, policing and administration of justice sovereign functions cannot be delegated.”
The Court clarified that limitation under Section 34, Arbitration Act, begins only upon disposal of proceedings formally instituted and entertained under Section 33 by the Arbitral Tribunal.
A petition was filed against widening of NH 46 as it passes through an important tiger and wildlife corridor, and any construction was likely to affect the movement of wild animals.
The Court accepted the contention that encashment of insurance surety bonds aggregating to nearly ₹100 crores, prior to final adjudication, would result in grave and irreversible loss and injury.
NHAI announced the discontinuation of KYV for FASTags, simplifying activation rules and easing highway travel for millions of commuters, effective 1-2-2026.
SEBI grants in-principle approval to register Highways Infra Investment Trust as InvIT, unlocking highway assets, boosting monetisation, and expanding investor opportunities nationwide.
Two tragic road accidents that occurred within consecutive days in Rajasthan and Telangana, claimed a total of 34 lives and leaving several others injured.
Emphasising that well-maintained footpaths is a judicially recognised right, the Court issued guidelines as an interim measure not only for pedestrian safety, but also for, wearing helmets; wrongful lane driving; dazzling LED lights/strobe lights/unauthorised hooters and framing of Rules by State Governments.
The PIL was filed due to repeated incidents of stray cattle being killed in road accidents or traffic congestions taking place.
“The photographs show that they are now constructing/ upgrading side lanes/diversions on both sides of the flyover at Arjun Barodia. In fact, as per the agreement and the norms of Road Congress guidelines, the service road ought to have been constructed before starting the construction work of the bridge/flyovers/subways, etc.”
The petition was filed alleging that soil extraction is being carried out in connection with the construction of the National Highway from Kasaragod to Thiruvananthapuram, where soil was extracted beyond the permissible limits altering the hill topography and causing severe environmental damage with the risk of landslides.
New FASTag Annual Pass to be effective from August 15, 2025.
To incentivize adoption of FASTag from user fee payment, Respondent 1 provided cashback ranging from 10% to 2.5% on toll transactions via FASTag from 2016 till March 2020 i.e., for five years.
“A novel plea has been taken for the first time without any substantial basis on the factual aspects about the non-delivery of the copy of the award by the Arbitrator to the NHAI, in the present appeal, which cannot be appreciated within the limited scope of Section 37.”
The Court stated that modifying or clarifying the judgment in Union of India v. Tarsem Singh, (2019) 9 SCC 304 would lend itself to violating the doctrine of immutability, undermining the finality of the decision.
“The authority should ensure that work done is of such quality that it is not easily damaged by rain and other weather conditions in future.”
The Court stated that the applicants had not acted in good faith, as they failed to take necessary steps to maintain the road or close/regulate traffic despite knowing the hazardous condition.