Calls For A Re-Examination: Karnataka High Court Suggests Union Ministry To Review & Insert Appropriate Clarificatory Definitions In MV Act
The Karnataka High Court dismissed a Writ Petition of Karavali Bus Owners Association and other bus operators of Mangalore and Udupi Districts.
Justice M. Nagaprasanna, Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court has suggested the Union Ministry of Surface Transport to undertake a review and insert appropriate clarificatory definitions in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (MV Act).
The Court was hearing a Writ Petition preferred by Karavali Bus Owners Association and other bus operators of Mangalore and Udupi Districts.
A Single Bench of Justice M. Nagaprasanna observed, “Before parting with the order, it would be appropriate to observe that the legislative framework especially the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 calls for a re examination qua description of vehicles. The Union Ministry of Surface Transport, the 1st respondent, would do well to undertake a review and insert appropriate clarificatory definitions, to address the evolving complexities of vehicular classifications and toll collection. The present dispute, while resolved within the existing legal rubric, reveals the need for statutory refinement.”
Senior Advocate Puttige R. Ramesh appeared for the Petitioners while Central Government Counsel (CGC) Aditya Singh, Senior Advocate C.K. Nanda Kumar, High Court Government Pleader (HCGP) Shamanth Naik, and Advocate Shilpa Shah appeared for the Respondents.
Brief Facts
The Petitioners were aggrieved by the rejection of the representation of the Bus Owners Association and confirmation of debit adjustment charges made towards movement of buses of the Association in the toll plazas. A consequential prohibition was sought against the Respondent not to deduct any additional toll charges from FASTag wallet account of the Petitioners. The grievance of the Petitioners was that the stage carriages operated by them move through Hejamadi and Sastana toll plazas among others. It was alleged that the fare that will be charged on every trip of each vehicle should be taken into consideration on the laden weight of the vehicles which is between 7,500 and 12,000 Kgs. insofar as mini vehicles are concerned. It was further alleged that two toll plazas deduct from the FASTag wallet of the Petitioners on the vehicles passing through FASTag ID which is linked to the FASTag account, when it is scanned at the toll plazas.
However, the Respondent without notice to the Petitioners was allegedly deducting additional toll charges from the FASTag wallet account of all the stage carriage permit holders of the Association. They came to know of the fact of the Respondent withdrawing additional toll charges in the form of “charge back process” from FASTag wallet account as and when it wishes to do so. Hence, the Association submitted a representation about its grievance to the Deputy Commissioner and District Magistrate, alleging that there is an illegal activity of collecting excessive toll charges from the account of the Petitioners when scanning the FASTag ID and sought to stop the illegal deductions. However, the said representation was rejected by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) holding that in terms of the schedule appended to the concession agreement, the debit adjustment followed as there is a mismatch found. Therefore, the Petitioners approached the High Court.
Reasoning
The High Court in view of the above facts, said, “The concessionaires rejection of the representation made by the petitioners on 01-02-2025 is thus found to be lawful, justifiable and within the four corners of the governing legal frame work.”
The Court added that the debit adjustment or the charge back mechanism has been rightly invoked in view of the discrepancies between registration data and the uploaded FASTag information.
“What is discernible from the preceding analysis is, while the Motor Vehicles Act defines classes of vehicles for regulatory purposes, toll classification is governed solely by the National Highways Act, the Fee Rules and the Concessionaire agreement”, it further noted.
The Court remarked that the legal foundation for toll adjustments due to vehicle mismatch is both statutory and contractual, making the Petitioners’ grievance legally untenable and thus, finding the Petition devoid of merit, it would necessarily meet its dismissal.
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Writ Petition and directed the Centre to redefine the classes of vehicles in the MV Act, bearing in mind the observations made in the Order, failing which, it would result in mushrooming of such submissions being projected.
Cause Title- Karavali Bus Owners Association (R) & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. [Case Number: WRIT PETITION No.9159 OF 2025 (GM - RES)]
Appearance:
Petitioners: Senior Advocate Puttige R. Ramesh and Advocate A.S. Parasara Kumar.
Respondents: CGC Aditya Singh, Senior Advocate C.K. Nanda Kumar, HCGP Shamanth Naik, Advocates Shilpa Shah, and Raghuram Cadambi.
