"Bombay High Court Dismisses Challenge to Mandatory FASTag, States *‘Courts Should Not Intervene in Policy Decisions Unless Arbitrary or Unfair’”
Kiran Raj
The Bombay High Court has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the mandatory implementation of FASTag for toll payments on national highways. The matter was heard by Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Bharati Dangre, who observed that “Courts are expected to be very slow to interfere in policy decisions, which are best left to the State Authority and their wisdom. Unless a policy is patently arbitrary or unfair, the court should not intervene.”
The PIL sought to quash circulars issued by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) on February 12, 2021, and February 14, 2021, which required commuters without FASTag to pay double the toll fees. The court held that “FASTag has been introduced as a policy decision aimed at providing efficient and seamless road travel,” and that the petitioner had failed to demonstrate any arbitrariness or illegality in the implementation of the policy.
The PIL was filed by Arjun Raju Khanapure, challenging the NHAI circulars under the directions of the Union of India. The petitioner contended that the conversion of cash lanes into FASTag-exclusive lanes was “illegal, arbitrary and violative of due process of law.” The petition sought a directive to keep at least one lane at toll plazas as a hybrid lane to allow cash payments.
The petitioner submitted that the mandatory FASTag requirement “adversely impacts certain sections of society who may not be technologically equipped to obtain or use FASTag.” It was argued that “there may be a class of people who are not yet introduced to technology and by restricting the movement of the vehicles used by them and being diverted to a lane and the direction to collect double toll fee for non FASTag users is arbitrary.”
The Union of India, represented by Senior Advocate R.V. Govilkar, submitted that “the decision to implement FASTag was spread over in phases, when the idea was floated in the year 2014.” It was further stated that “the introduction of FASTag is a policy decision aimed at providing efficient and seamless road travel” and that it had been implemented nationwide after providing sufficient time for public adaptation.
The Advocate General of Maharashtra, Dr. Birendra Saraf, appearing for NHAI, raised a preliminary objection, arguing that “the petitioner is adversely impacted by the charging of double fees as fine for non FASTag cleared payment through cash,” making it a case of personal grievance rather than a public interest issue.
The court examined the relevant provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956, and the National Highways Fee (Determination of Rates and Collection) Rules, 2008. It referred to Rule 6, which prescribes the manner of toll collection and allows payments through FASTag or cash. The judgment recorded: “FASTag was introduced as an onboard unit (transponder) or any such device fitted on the front windscreen of the vehicle, and the concept of ‘FASTag lane of fee plaza’ was established as an exclusive lane for vehicles fitted with such devices.”
The judgment further stated: “FASTag has been made user-friendly, as many options are open for instant recharging like online banking, UPI, My FASTag Mobile App, Banks App, cash recharge through Bharat Bill Payment System available at POS.”
The petitioner had argued that mandatory FASTag implementation violated the right to freedom of movement under Article 19(1)(d) of the Constitution. The court rejected this argument, stating: “The apprehension of the Petitioner that if a vehicle is not fitted with FASTag, it shall not be allowed to cross the toll plaza is an erroneous assumption.”
The court recorded that “if a vehicle is found with a defective FASTag or without FASTag, it shall be diverted towards left lane and upon entering this lane, the user shall pay a fee equivalent to two times of the fee applicable to that category of the vehicle.”
The judgment further stated: “It is a misconception of the petitioner that the amount collected from the vehicle, which is not fitted with FASTag, is by way of penalty.” The court cited Rule 6 of the 2008 Rules, which states that “a vehicle not fitted with FASTag or without valid and functional FASTag, entering into ‘FASTag lane’ of the fee plazas shall pay a ‘fee’ equivalent to two times of the fee applicable to that category of the vehicle.”
The court also referred to a government notification, which stated: “Any vehicle, which is not fitted with FASTag, shall obtain a FASTag at the POS set up at the fee plaza, affix it and activate it on the spot before entering into the fee plaza lane.”
The court recorded that “the use of FASTag is sought to be encouraged as it leads to reduction in waiting time, fuel consumption and pollution levels at fee plazas and from 15/02/2021, fee collection system at all fee plazas of National Highways is directed to be processed through FASTag alone.”
The court dismissed the PIL, stating: “Finding no justiciability to interfere in the policy decision taken by Respondent No.1 and implemented by Respondent No.2, we dismiss the Public Interest Litigation.”
It further stated: “Once the policy of FASTag on the National Highways has been rolled out and implemented phase-wise, it is expected to cover each and every individual/vehicle which intends to use the highway.”
The interim application filed by the petitioner was also disposed of.
Advocates Representing the Parties
For the Petitioner: Uday Warunjikar, Mr. Vijaykumar B. Dighe, Mr. Amol Ohal
For the Respondents:
- R.V. Govilkar, Senior Advocate, with Mr. D.P. Singh and Ms. Shaba Khan for Union of India
- Birendra Saraf, Advocate General, with Mr. Vaibhav Charalwar, Mr. Prashant Mishra, Mr. Bharat Jadhav, Ms. Purva Birla, and Mr. Darshil Shah for NHAI
- Sahil Mate, i/b Mr. Pradumna Sharma for Respondent No.3
Case Title: Arjun Raju Khanapure v. Union of India & Ors.
Neutral Citation: 2025:BHC-AS:11931-DB
Case Number: PIL No. 75 of 2021 with IA No. 2383 of 2021
Bench: Chief Justice Alok Aradhe, Justice Bharati Dangre
[Read/Download order]
