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.

The interim order was passed by IHC Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir after hearing a petition filed by advocate Muhammad Jalal Haider, who had challenged the legality of the notification issued by the NHA on May 30, 2025.

The court issued notices to the respondents, including the federation and the NHA, directing them to file a report and para-wise comments within a fortnight. The case was adjourned until August 3.

Pending further proceedings, the court ordered that the impugned notification “shall remain suspended”.

According to the petition, the NHA had introduced an additional 50pc 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 only authorises the NHA 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 also maintained that the NHA, being 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 any monetary penalty.

The counsel submitted that the additional 50pc charge was, in substance, a penalty imposed without statutory backing, and that executive notifications could not create substantive liabilities beyond the parent legislation.

The petition further argued that the additional amount had no nexus with services rendered by the authority and was therefore beyond the powers granted under the NHA Act, making 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 of hearing and sought responses from the respondents.