Toll staff acted under National Highways Fee Rules as advocate repeatedly sought toll-free passage in a private vehicle

Lucknow, 16 January 2026:

The incident reported at the Gotona Bara Toll Plaza in Barabanki was neither accidental nor the result of any unilateral action, according to a revised note issued in response to the show cause notice. The note states that the episode was part of a series of deliberately provoked disputes.

As per the reply, an advocate arrived at the toll plaza on December 30, 2025, in a private vehicle and refused to pay the prescribed toll fee under the National Highways Fee Rules, 2008. The rules, it clarifies, do not provide any exemption from toll payment to advocates travelling in private vehicles.

The note states that the individual demanded toll-free passage and deliberately created a dispute, disrupting normal toll operations. To avoid escalation and any potential law-and-order situation, toll plaza staff, while following standard procedures and exercising restraint, allowed the vehicle to pass.

It further notes that the same advocate later returned to the toll plaza and again demanded toll-free passage. The reply describes this demand as contrary to the rules and an apparent attempt to exert undue pressure on toll management, adding that the repeated nature of the conduct indicated it was premeditated rather than incidental.

The reply also highlights that the National Highways Fee Rules do not provide for an immediate penal mechanism against individuals who refuse to pay toll charges. Consequently, the responsibility of ensuring compliance rests entirely with toll personnel. Any failure to enforce the rules could expose both the staff and the operating agency to contractual penalties, audit objections, and possible administrative action.

According to the note, toll plaza employees are legally bound to ensure compliance with applicable rules, and their intervention during disputes forms part of their official duties. Such actions, it states, should not be viewed as personal conduct or attributed to any mala fide intent.

The company has also raised concerns over selective video clips and images of the incident being circulated on social media, alleging that these created a one-sided narrative while omitting the full background, including the earlier incident on December 30. The reply terms the formation of public opinion without an impartial examination of all facts as improper.

While reiterating that it does not condone physical confrontation or the use of inappropriate language under any circumstances, the company stated that it has terminated the services of the concerned employee to uphold professional standards. It clarified that the decision was taken as a measure of moral responsibility and should not be construed as an admission of unilateral fault.

The note further expresses concern that, in some cases, legal professionals or influential individuals may seek to use such incidents for personal, professional, or promotional gain, resulting in reputational harm to toll agencies and their staff.

In light of the incident, the company has recommended that the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) consider setting up an independent and impartial review or mediation mechanism to examine such disputes based on evidence from both sides and arrive at balanced decisions.

The revised note states that it has been issued in the interest of public welfare, legal clarity, and fairness, reiterating that compliance with the law is mandatory for all citizens without exception.