ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Friday suspended the operation of a National Highway Authority (NHA) notification that imposed an additional 50 per cent toll on vehicles travelling on motorways without an M‑Tag or with insufficient balance in their M‑Tag accounts.
Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir of the IHC issued an interim order after hearing a petition filed by advocate Muhammad Jalal Haider, who challenged the legality of a May 30, 2025 notification issued by the NHA.
The court served notice on the respondents—the federal government and the NHA—requiring them to submit a report and detailed comments within two weeks. The hearing was then adjourned to August 3.
Pending further proceedings, the court ordered that the contested notification remain suspended.
According to the petition, the NHA had introduced an additional 50 % toll on vehicles using motorways without an M‑Tag or with an inadequate balance in their M‑Tag accounts through the May 30 notification.
Counsel for the petitioner argued that Section 10(vii) of the National Highway Authority Act, 1991 authorises the NHA only to levy and collect tolls on national highways, strategic roads and other roads entrusted to it.
He contended that the provision does not empower the authority to impose any penalty, surcharge or additional fiscal burden on road users.
The petition maintained that the NHA, as a statutory body, could exercise only those powers expressly conferred upon it by law. It argued that neither the NHA Act nor the rules framed under it declared travelling without an M‑Tag or with insufficient balance to be an offence carrying a monetary penalty.
The counsel submitted that the additional 50 % charge was, in substance, a penalty imposed without statutory backing, and that executive notifications could not create substantive liabilities beyond the parent legislation.
The petitioner further argued that the additional amount bore no connection to services rendered by the authority and was therefore beyond the powers granted under the NHA Act, rendering the notification ultra vires and without lawful authority.
The petitioner requested the court to declare the May 30 notification “unconstitutional, illegal and of no legal effect”. He also sought directions for the NHA to refund the additional amounts collected under the notification and to place on record the complete mechanism governing M‑Tag balance management and its utilisation.
After hearing the preliminary arguments, the court suspended the notification until the next date and sought responses from the respondents.
