The Delhi High Court has lifted the stay on the National Highways Authority of India’s (NHAI) decision to terminate a contractor over delays in the Delhi-Mumbai Expressway project, emphasising that public infrastructure cannot suffer due to contractual disputes.
A division bench comprising Justices Dinesh Mehta and Vinod Kumar, on January 13, set aside a single judge’s January 2 order that had restrained NHAI from acting on its December 23, 2025 “notice of intent to terminate” issued to Roadway Solutions India Infra Ltd.
The bench held that such an injunction was unwarranted and would only serve to delay a critical national infrastructure project. “We feel that the balance of convenience entirely lies in the favour of the nation and citizens of India and in turn NHAI and not in favour of the contractor. Because the citizenry cannot be deprived of a well-constructed highway to ensure smooth and free movement,” the court stated.
The dispute arose from alleged delays in the completion of a 35-kilometre stretch in Gujarat, part of the Delhi-Mumbai Expressway project. The entire highway is 794 km long, but due to the delay, an 87-km stretch remains incomplete, forcing vehicles to take detours, the court was told.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing NHAI, said the contractor had failed to complete work on three packages awarded in 2024, seriously impacting the overall timeline of the expressway. “All the passengers travelling on the newly constructed expressway were required to take a detour,” he submitted.
He further argued that NHAI was unable to issue fresh tenders to complete the work unless the stay was vacated, which was stalling progress on the project.
Interestingly, Roadway Solutions India Infra Ltd had itself issued a “notice of intention to terminate” the contract on December 18, 2025, alleging that NHAI had failed to provide contiguous land for construction.
Noting this, the bench observed, “In the facts of the present case, when the contractor itself wanted the contract to be terminated, one cannot conclude at this stage as to whether the contractor really wanted to work or it simply wants to wriggle out of the contractual obligations or escape the consequences entailing the termination of contract.”
The court added that it was not appropriate for the judiciary to interfere in decisions involving infrastructure contracts unless there was a compelling reason. “There was enough material to show that NHAI had valid and legit reasons to issue the termination notice,” it observed.
The court made it clear that determination of who was at fault—NHAI or the contractor—would be decided in arbitration proceedings.
However, it also protected the contractor from financial coercion in the interim, directing NHAI not to encash the insurance surety bonds and bank guarantees furnished by the company until the single judge disposes of the related plea.
Roadway Solutions had approached the single judge earlier this year seeking a stay on NHAI’s termination notice, calling it illegal and arbitrary. The single judge had granted the interim relief on January 2, but that has now been overturned by the division bench.
The bench has also clarified that NHAI is now free to proceed with issuing fresh tenders for the pending stretch.
