HC directs NHAI to adhere to norms at Paliyekkara toll plaza
The NHAI ought to ensure that each vehicle (with FasTag) passed the toll plaza within 10 seconds and that queues did not exceed 100 m, the court said.
The interim order was passed in response to a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by O.J. Janeesh, seeking effective regulation of traffic and mitigation of congestion at the toll plaza. Referring to NHAI guidelines, the court said that vehicles must be permitted to pass through the toll booth without being charged, if the queue of vehicles exceeded the prescribed limit (of 100 m). It directed the NHAI to strictly implement the directive, failing which it ought to submit an affidavit explaining the reasons for non-compliance. The matter has been posted for further hearing on May 21.
The District Collector of Thrissur had on April 28 suspended toll collection at the Paliyekkara toll plaza, citing severe traffic congestion mainly due to the ongoing construction of an underpass on National Highway 544. The Collector also directed the NHAI to take prompt measures to ensure steady flow of vehicles, with police help. The order was subsequently withdrawn after the NHAI assured that corrective measures will be undertaken.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
9 hours ago
- The Hindu
Kerala High Court imposes ₹50,000-fine on litigant
The Kerala High Court has imposed a fine of ₹50,000 on a litigant, who appeared as party-in-person in a case, for allegedly threatening the judge who was hearing his case. The litigant reportedly said that he had filed a complaint against the judge before the President of India and the other authorities. While imposing the fine amount, a Single Bench of Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan observed that he was discharging his duty in accordance with the Constitution of India, and that he was not bothered about such threats. He added that he was exercising his judicial powers in accordance with the law and the Constitution. Such litigants who appear in person must be familiar with the basics of courtroom decorum and must also know the consequences of making unnecessary submissions even after a warning, the judge said. The same litigant had earlier been warned by the court for allegedly attempting to engage in 'forum shopping', after he asked the court to avoid his case. He had also engaged in similar behaviour before other High Court Benches as well.
Hindustan Times
14 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
CBI takes over investigation in case of missing sailor from Kerala
New Delhi, The CBI has taken over the investigation in the case of Abhinandh Yesudasan, who mysteriously went missing eight years ago from a ship where he was working as a pipe fitter, officials said on Monday. CBI takes over investigation in case of missing sailor from Kerala The federal agency has taken over the investigation on the orders of the Kerala High Court, which was hearing a plea moved by the sailor's father, Yesudasan. Abhinandh from Kollam in Kerala was working in Aries Marines LLC, a Sharjah-based company in the United Arab Emirates . During the course of his employment, he went missing from the ship on its voyage from Egypt to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on March 21, 2017. His father had submitted in the complaint to the state police that Abhinandh contacted the family several times over the phone from Egypt and Turkiye and sounded very happy. On March 17, 2017, he told the family members that other co-workers were torturing him due to his lack of work experience, his father had alleged. Abhinandh told the family that his supervisor was torturing him brutally and that was the last communication received from him, his father said in the complaint. Abhinandh cut the phone call by saying that it was the time for passport verification, his father said. In its submissions to the high court, the Kerala Police explained its limitation in conducting an exhaustive probe, citing a Supreme Court judgment in the case of Italian marines that had said the state police had no territorial jurisdiction to investigate an offence that happened beyond 12 nautical miles from land area. It said since Abhinandh had gone missing from the ship, which was under the Bahamas' flag in international waters, the offence, if any, committed by anyone on the vessel has to be dealt only under Bahamas Law. "And since the Union of India does not have any MLAT with Bahamas, the assistance of Interpol could not be sought in this case," a statement filed by the detective inspector in the court said. It said Interpol channels were tapped and the national central bureaus of the UAE and Saudi Arabia had already communicated that they did not have any information about the incident and NCB Cairo had sought a letter rogatory for the information. Police said the version of the Bahamas would be extremely crucial in the case. "If a man is missing and his whereabouts are not known, it is the duty of the state and the central government to see that an investigation is conducted and concluded in accordance with law," Justice P V Kunhikrishnan said in his order while handing over the probe to the CBI. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
New Indian Express
18 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Orissa HC refuses to order FIR in dispute over NHAI aid
CUTTACK: In a significant development concerning alleged irregularities in a multi-crore land compensation case linked to the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI), the Orissa High Court has declined to issue directions to the Keonjhar police for registering an FIR. Justice Chittaranjan Dash, while hearing a criminal miscellaneous petition (CRLMP) filed by three women from a Scheduled Caste community, observed that the dispute involved complex questions of fact requiring examination of evidence and was best suited for adjudication by magistrate court. The petition was filed by Saraswati Sethy, Srimati Sethy and Malati Behera, who claimed they were defrauded in the disbursal of compensation related to land acquired by the NHAI. The petitioners alleged that although they were rightfully entitled to 50 per cent of the compensation, the major share of Rs 21.08 crore was fraudulently received by one person. They further alleged that the remaining amount of Rs 6.96 crore, initially granted to them, was also usurped by the person with connivance of NHAI officials and the land acquisition officer, Keonjhar. The petitioners also accused the police of taking no action on their written complaint dated December 16, 2024. They claimed that even the Economic Offences Wing (EOW), Bhubaneswar was informed but took no steps.
