The SC held that Respondent No. 1, a society registered to promote welfare of NOIDA residents, had locus standi to file the writ petition challenging imposition of toll/user fees by NTBCL on DND Flyway. The delay was condoned as commuters trusted NOIDA to protect their interests initially. Judicial intervention was justified given the public interest involved. Selection of NTBCL without bidding violated Article 14. NOIDA lacked real choice in extending the concession period due to unreasonably escalated project cost calculated to make repayment impossible. NTBCL recovered project cost and profits through illegal toll/fees. No opinion on outdoor advertisement dues as it was outside the scope of appeal. The HC judgment restraining toll/fees was upheld.
The SC held that Respondent No. 1, a society registered to promote welfare of NOIDA residents, had locus standi to file the writ petition challenging imposition of toll/user fees by NTBCL on DND Flyway. The delay was condoned as commuters trusted NOIDA to protect their interests initially. Judicial intervention was justified given the public interest involved. Selection of NTBCL without bidding violated Article 14. NOIDA lacked real choice in extending the concession period due to unreasonably escalated project cost calculated to make repayment impossible. NTBCL recovered project cost and profits through illegal toll/fees. No opinion on outdoor advertisement dues as it was outside the scope of appeal. The HC judgment restraining toll/fees was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
