MD. KARIMUNNISA vs NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 17.04.2026 Judgment pronounced on: 20.04.2026 Judgment uploaded on: 20.04.2026 + W.P.(C) 4817/2026, CM APPL. 23578/2026, CM APPL. 23579/2026, CM APPL. 23580/2026 and CM APPL. 24716/2026 MD. KARIMUNNISA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Kaustubh Anshuraj, Mr. Parmod Kalirana, Mr. Manish Choudhary, Mr. Amaya Vaid, Advs. versus NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. N. Venkataraman, ASG with Mr. Namit Saxena, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN JUDGMENT ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. : 1. Through the present Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner assails the order dated 08.04.2026 [hereinafter referred to as the „Impugned Order‟], along with the show cause notice dated 02.04.2026 [hereinafter referred to as the „Impugned Show Cause Notice‟], whereby the Contract dated 26.05.2025 [hereinafter referred to as „Contract‟] executed between Signature Not Verified Signed By:JAI NARAYAN Signing Date:20.04.2026 W.P.(C) 4817/2026 Page 1 of 18 17:17:31 the Petitioner and the NHAI for collection of user fee at Pawangaon Fee Plaza has been terminated prior to expiry of the contractual period. The Petitioner has also challenged the fresh tender dated 02.04.2026 issued for engagement of a new user fee collecting agency for three months for the said Fee Plaza. 2. The Petitioner contends that the termination of the Contract is arbitrary, premeditated and contrary to the contractual stipulations, particularly Clause 35(6) of the Contract [hereinafter referred to as „Clause 35(6)‟], inasmuch as no circumstances warranting invocation of the said clause existed. It is furth