Professional Documents
Culture Documents
All About Defence Toll Exemption
All About Defence Toll Exemption
Your reference :
Our reference :
Nav/Toll/Mov/2
1. Letter No 12668 / Mov C dated 15 Nov 2007 issued by your directorate and circulated
to all Commands has resulted in a little confusion on the issue and many references have
been addressed to me from military establishments all over the country. In the succeeding
paragraphs, an effort has been made to essentially clear the following doubts (with
supporting documents) that have emerged after issuance of your ibid letter :-
1. Whether toll tax exemption is available only on National Highways and not on
other roads or bridges ?
2. Whether toll tax exemption can only be claimed while being in uniform and ‘on
duty’ ?
. “Ministry of Law and Justice have indicated that Indian Tolls (Army and
Air Force) Act 1901 is a special Act which over-rides general acts such as
National Highways Act, 1956 and private vehicles of the officers, soldiers and
airmen of regular forces are exempted from paying toll irrespective of whether they
are on duty or not.”
4. Supreme Court Orders upholding toll tax exemption to defence personnel. Toll
exemption orders obtained by me and exemption to ‘off duty’ and ‘on duty’ defence
personnel on all Central, State, private and public roads and bridges and also the provisions
of the Indian Tolls (Army & Air Force) Act, 1901, were challenged before the Hon’ble
Punjab & Haryana High Court by one Mr Sanjeev Kumar through Civil Writ Petition No
8508 of 2006. The Petition was however dismissed by a division bench of the Hon’ble High
Court which held that the Act provided for concessions to defence personnel and that there
was no reason to interfere. The Petitioner had then challenged the order of the Hon’ble
High Court in the Hon’ble Supreme Court by way of a Special Leave Petition (SLP 15419
of 2006). It was again submitted by the Petitioner before the Hon’ble Supreme Court that
the Act which provided for toll tax exemption to even ‘off-duty’ defence personnel and
their private vehicles on all Public and Private roads and bridges in India and which had
an overriding effect on all Acts, directions, ordinances, orders etc of the Central and the
State Governments, was against the spirit of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and had
outlived its utility. A division bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court has however upheld the
orders of the Hon’ble High Court and dismissed the Special Leave Petition. The order of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court dismissing the Special Leave Petition is enclosed as Appendix E.
The said Order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court was widely covered by the media too and one
of such news-reports is enclosed as Appendix F.
5. Problems faced in certain States and their subsequent redressal. When the
entitlement of defence personnel as per the Act was adequately agitated, most of the States
acted quite favourably and there was not much of a problem in getting the Act implemented
in letter and spirit. However, there were problems reported from certain states which were
symptomatically addressed, some examples are :-
(a) Punjab. Directions issued by the Hon’ble Human Rights Commission in ‘Capt
Navdeep Singh Vs State of Punjab’ case in which the State govt was directed not to
harass defence personnel at toll plazas (Orders at Appendix G)
2. Himachal Pradesh. A cabinet decision followed when the issue was strongly
taken up by HQ Western Command on receipt of reports of infringement of the Act
from the State (News-report at Appendix H)
(c) Kerala. Strict implementation of the Act confirmed by the State Govt vide
Annexure I.
(d) Uttrakhand. Instructions issued to all toll operators and exemption to private
vehicles confirmed vide Appendix J.
(e) Gujarat. Compliance report for private vehicles and ‘off duty’ regular
personnel provided vide Appendix K.
5. In the past, there were instances where private toll operators took a plea that there was
no mention of toll exemption to defence personnel when they were allotted toll contracts.
Such a plea is redundant and void and against the principles of the Indian Contract Act since
any contract against the law of the land is a nullity. The provisions of the Indian Tolls (Army
& Air Force) Act cannot be overridden by any contract to the contrary. Moreover, before
starting operations, all toll operators usually undertake to follow the law of the land in their
contracts, and law includes the said Act.
5. The above Appendices and provisions bring out the following facts clearly, in brief :-
(a) That the Indian Tolls (Army & Air Force) Act, 1901, provides for toll exemption
to personnel of regular forces and their private vehicles at all times, irrespective of
whether they are on duty or not.
(b) That there is no requirement of being ‘in uniform’ to avail toll exemption.
(c) That toll exemption is available all over the country on both private and public
roads and bridges. Central and State governments are both under the ambit of the Act.
(d) That at present, DND Flyway is not providing toll exemption but the case has not
been finally decided and is very much pending vide an Appeal. The matter is again
sub judice.
(e) That ex-servicemen are not entitled to toll exemption and various representations
on the issue would not serve any purpose being contrary to the legislative provisions
and mandate of the Act. The Ministry of Road Transport & Highways as a goodwill
gesture has already exempted ex-servicemen who are gallantry award winners from
payment of toll tax on National Highways. Roads and bridges other than NHs are not
under the purview of MoRTH.
(f) That the Hon’ble Supreme Court has dismissed a petition challenging the
exemption to private vehicles of defence personnel on all private and public roads
and bridges all over the country. The Hon’ble Supreme Court refused to strike down
Section 3 of the Act which provides for exemption.
(g) That infringement of the Act in various States has been effectively tackled
symptomatically including in Himachal Pradesh where maximum violations were
reported.
11. In view of the above, it is requested that clarifications, as deemed appropriate, may
kindly be issued to the establishments to whom letter No 12668/Mov C dated 15 Nov 2007
had been addressed so that the confusion on the issue is cleared. You are also welcome to
seek any further input / amplification on the issue from me.
(Navdeep Singh)
Copy to :-
COAS Sectt For Information, record, further
reference,
and dissemination please