(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 2272 OF 2010 Priyadarshini d/o. Sudhir Pokharkar, Age : 24 years, Occupation : Trainee in Rucha Engineering, Waluj-M.I.D.C., Aurangabad, R/o. C-5, Savitaraj Complex, Behind Naik College, Cannaught Place, CIDCO, Aurangabad. .. Petitioner. versus 1. The Secretary, Transport Ministry, Mantralaya, Mumbai. 2. The State of Maharashtra (through Principal Secretary of Maharashtra State, Mantralaya, Mumbai) 3. The Secretary, Transport Ministry, Union of India, New Delhi. 4. Union of India, through Principal Secretary, Near Parliament House, New Delhi. .. Respondents. ....................... (2) Mr. S.D. Pokharkar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. N.B. Khandare, Government Pleader, for respondent nos.1 and 2. Mr. Alok Sharma, Assistant Solicitor General, for respondent nos.3 and 4. ........................ CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, CJ. & S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 26TH AUGUST 2010 COURT'S ORDER (Per Chief Justice) : 1. The learned Government Pleader places on record, the Government Resolution dated 30th July 2009, laying down the principles for awarding contracts for collection of toll on the highways. 2. In view of the above, the grievances voiced by the petitioner, in the present petition, have to be examined on the touch stone of the principles and guidelines laid down in the aforesaid Government Resolution. In so far as the contention of the petitioner, that the respondent should not allow the contractor to collect more than a particular amount of toll, it is not based on any legal right. In the absence of any legal right, it is not (3) possible to accept the contention raised in the petition. 3. However, as regards the petitioner's contention, that the concessional toll for the return pass being granted to the vehicles, should be operative for a period of 24 hours, and the same should not be merely from the midnight of one date to the midnight of the next date, it is open to the petitioner to make a representation to the respondents. We are sure, if such a representation is made, the same shall be considered by the respondents, in proper perspective. 4. Subject to the above directions, the petition is disposed of. 5. The amount of Rs. 20,000/-, deposited by the petitioner, is permitted to be withdrawn by the petitioner. (S.V. GANGAPURWALA ) (MOHIT S. SHAH) JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE ......................... Puranik (PS) bgp/wp2272