The Supreme Court’s ruling that tolls cannot be collected on highway stretches that are filled with potholes has brought more clarity to legal questions raised over monetizing the highways without accountability for proper maintenance. Although the SC ruling pertains to toll collection on a bad highway stretch in Kerala and does not impose a blanket ban on the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) or its agents from collecting tolls on highways with bad stretches across the country, it has set a strong legal precedent on the toll regime vis-à-vis the accountability of highway maintenance. The SC upheld the Kerala High Court’s impugned order suspending toll collection for a 65-km stretch of NH-544 in Kerala and dismissed an appeal filed by the NHAI. The SC bench comprising Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran strongly affirmed the reasoning of the Kerala High Court that states, “The obligation of the public to pay a user fee under statutory provisions is premised on the assurance that their use of the road will be free from hindrances. When the public is legally bound to pay a user fee, they simultaneously acquire a corresponding right to demand unhindered, safe, and regulated access to the road. Any failure on the part of the National Highways Authority or its agents to ensure such access constitutes a breach of the public’s legitimate expectations and undermines the very basis of the toll regime.” A parallel can be drawn to objections being raised in Assam and other Northeastern states over toll collection along pothole-ridden highway stretches, but perpetual delay in repair and maintenance work is reflective of NHAI apathy and systemic neglect. The SC ruling brings citizens’ rights to the centre stage of the policy discourse on highway monetisation and demolishes the notion that toll collection is an unconditional legal entailment of NHAI or the concessionaire who builds the road under the Build, Operate and Transfer (BOT) system and road users are bound to pay toll irrespective of highway condition. “Let the citizens be free to move on the roads, for use of which they have already paid taxes, without further payment to navigate the gutters and potholes, symbols of inefficiency.” This judicial clarity in SC’s observation makes it clear for the NHAI that highway and other public infrastructure monetisation is conditional and maintenance is a must for charging a toll fee to road users. The SC order also addressed the question if toll collection can be suspended for an entire highway stretch if maintenance work disrupts traffic movement in small stretches of it. “Even if only 5 km at the black spots in the 65 km stretch are affected, the fact remains that the cascading effect of the traffic jam at the black spots compounds the hours to traverse the entire stretch,” insisted the apex court. Commuters in Assam and other states of the region experience similar situations along strategically important highways. The situation worsens during monsoon and several months afterwards when traffic along several highways is badly affected due to landslides and flood damage, but there is no halt to toll collection even when commuting along these highways becomes a harrowing experience due to dilapidated road conditions. The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways informed the Lok Sabha that in the case of BOT projects, after the end of the concession period, the toll plaza is handed over to the government, and thereafter the user fee is collected by the government through its implementing agencies. The revenue collected by the government from user fee collection is deposited in the Consolidated Fund of India, and the funds provided through budgetary allocations are utilised for the development of the National Highway. However, official data shows that funds budgeted for highway maintenance account for just one per cent of the ministry’s total budget, which is grossly inadequate when the vast network of NH across the country is considered. The SC’s astute remark that “in a democracy, roads are laid on BOT contracts to ensure that the cost is collected from the users when motor vehicle tax is remitted for their use on roads, which is a sad reflection of the free market” holds the mirror to the policy makers and executives on marginalisation of the citizens in highway monetisation. It is hoped that the SC ruling will be an eye-opener for the NHAI, and it will proactively recalibrate the toll regime, linking it to citizens’ right to safe and smooth movement along the highways against taxes they have paid and the toll fee they are charged. Strengthening the monitoring and oversight mechanism will be crucial to ensure that the quality of highway construction and maintenance meets the global standards of travel-worthiness. Transparency on the utilisation of toll fee collection for highway maintenance is critical to adhere to the spirit of the SC ruling for safeguarding the users’ rights while monetising highways.