The Bombay High Court recently dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the circulars issued by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) that mandate vehicles without FASTag to pay double toll fees. The ruling upheld the policy aimed at promoting digital toll payments for smoother and more efficient road travel.
Court’s Observation on FASTag Implementation
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Bharati Dangre emphasized the benefits of FASTag, stating:
“At present, there is rarely any person in this country, especially in cities like Mumbai and Pune, who does not use a mobile phone. When mobiles are used, users are also acquainted with the procedure of its recharge. Though it is not expected that a person should be thoroughly techno-savvy, the FASTag system is simple and can even be used offline.”
The court found no valid reason to interfere in the policy decision, recognizing that FASTag was introduced to enhance the efficiency of toll collection and minimize congestion at toll plazas.
Petitioner’s Arguments and Court’s Response
The petitioner sought to quash the NHAI circulars dated February 12, 2021, and February 14, 2021, which enforce double toll fees for non-FASTag vehicles. Additionally, the petitioner requested that at least one hybrid lane remain available for cash payments or other modes of payment.
Read Also:- Bombay High Court Directs Maharashtra DGP to Consider Complaint on Alleged False Rape Cases
The primary concerns raised by the petitioner included:
- A segment of the population may not be familiar with digital transactions.
- Imposing double toll fees was arbitrary and penalized non-FASTag users unfairly.
- The policy allegedly violated the right to free movement under Article 19(1)(d) of the Indian Constitution.
However, the court rejected these arguments, stating:
“The decision to implement FASTag was phased and spread over several years, providing ample time for citizens to adapt. Additionally, the Ministry of Road Transport & Highways had provided cashback incentives ranging from 10% to 2.5% on toll transactions via FASTag from 2016 to 2020.”
FASTag: Policy Decision and Legal Standing
FASTag was introduced in 2014 and gradually implemented across India. It became mandatory only after a structured rollout and public awareness initiatives. The court noted that various notifications and amendments to the National Highways Fee (Determination of Rates and Collection) Rules, 2008, provided clear legal backing for the policy.
Read Also:- Bombay High Court Imposes ₹1 Lakh Penalty for Unauthorized Audio Recording of Court Proceedings
The court specifically addressed the claim that double toll fees amounted to a penalty, clarifying:
“The amount collected from vehicles without FASTag is not a penalty but a fee, as per the second proviso of Rule 6(3) of the National Highways Fee Rules.”
Additionally, the argument that mandatory FASTag use violated fundamental rights was dismissed. The court stated that vehicles without FASTag are not restricted from traveling on highways. Instead, they can obtain and activate FASTag at designated points at toll plazas.
Convenience and Public Adoption of FASTag
The ruling highlighted that FASTag offers multiple user-friendly options for recharging and managing payments, including:
- UPI transactions
- Online banking
- Mobile applications like 'My FASTag'
- Cash recharge at designated points
The court acknowledged the policy’s effectiveness in reducing congestion and pollution at toll plazas, ultimately benefiting the public at large.
Read Also:- Bombay HC Grants Bail in POCSO Case Citing Minor’s “Sufficient Awareness” of Consensual Relationship
The Bombay High Court concluded that the policy enforcing FASTag lanes and imposing double toll fees on non-FASTag vehicles is neither arbitrary nor unconstitutional. The PIL was dismissed, reinforcing the government’s objective of streamlining toll collection through digital means.
“We do not find any restriction on the movement of vehicles, as claimed by the petitioner. However, to encourage the use of FASTag instead of cash, it is imperative for non-FASTag vehicles to pay double the fee.”
Case title: Arjun Raju Khanapure vs. Union of India & Ors. (Public Interest Litigation No.75 Of 2021)
