Bengaluru High Court Halts Somanahalli Toll Collection, Mandates Free Local Passes
In a landmark judgment, the Karnataka High Court has delivered a significant ruling concerning the controversial Somanahalli toll plaza located on Kanakapura Road. The court has declared that the collection of tolls at this facility, without the installation of a closed user fee collection system, is in direct violation of the national highways rules.
Court Orders Immediate Relief for Residents
Justice Suraj Govindaraj, presiding over the case, has directed the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) and the concessionaire to issue free local resident passes within a strict timeframe of 30 days. This order applies to the petitioners—residents of Somanahalli, Nelaguli, and Kaggalipura villages—and all other similarly situated individuals who apply for these passes, subject to verification of their residency. The court emphasized that no toll or user fee should be levied on these passes.
Multiple Violations of National Highway Rules
The judgment highlighted several critical breaches of the National Highways Fee (Determination of Rates and Collection) Rules, 2008. Key findings include:
- The toll plaza's location on National Highway 209 contravenes rules that mandate such facilities be situated at least 10 kilometers beyond municipal or local town limits.
- Levying tolls without providing a service route was deemed arbitrary and unreasonable by the court.
- The distance between the Somanahalli toll plaza and the next one is approximately 89 kilometers, forcing locals to pay for the entire stretch despite using only a small portion.
Background and Petitioners' Grievances
The case was initiated in 2024 by Manjesh Kumar and other villagers who argued that the toll plaza's establishment ignored their concerns. Despite requests from Kaggalipura, Taralu, and Somanahalli gram panchayats to delay the plaza until service roads were built, the concessionaire proceeded with infrastructure setup. Additionally, the petitioners noted that the newly formed Greater Bengaluru Authority (GBA) extends beyond Somanahalli village, placing the toll plaza within its jurisdiction.
Court Rejects Government's Arguments
The government advocate contended that there is no prohibition on setting up toll plazas near village panchayats and suggested that petitioners could avail monthly passes priced at Rs 340. However, Justice Govindaraj firmly rejected this stance, stating:
- Discounted passes are merely a mitigation measure and cannot substitute for mandatory location compliance.
- Such passes do not legitimize toll collection when locals have no alternative but to repeatedly use the plaza for essential services.
The judge pointed out that statutory rules require a minimum distance of 60 kilometers between toll plazas, leaving a buffer of nearly 29 kilometers for potential relocation of the Somanahalli facility if necessary.
Strong Judicial Rebuke and Future Implications
In a strongly worded observation, Justice Govindaraj criticized the authorities for imposing an onerous burden on citizens. He stated, "In the present case, the respondents chose the most onerous course for the citizen: they neither provided a service road nor an alternate road; they declined to implement a closed user fee collection system; and yet they insisted upon toll collection, effectively compelling residents to pay for every act of daily existence."
The court concluded that, in the absence of safeguards, toll collection from local residents is unjust, oppressive, and contrary to the 2008 Fee Rules. As a result, the petition was allowed, with a stern warning: if the directions are not complied with, the respondents must immediately cease toll collection at Somanahalli and relocate the plaza to a rule-compliant location.
This ruling sets a precedent for toll plaza operations across India, emphasizing the need for adherence to regulatory frameworks and consideration for local communities' daily needs.
