The Islamabad High Court has stepped into a dispute over a 50 percent surcharge on motorway tolls for vehicles carrying insufficient M-Tag balances, issuing formal notices to the Ministry of Communications and other respondents. Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfaraz Dogar presided over the hearing on Wednesday, responding to a petition filed by the Judicial Activism Panel that challenges the June 3, 2025, notification authorizing the higher fee. Main Developments During the proceedings, the chief justice questioned whether the surcharge represented a government policy measure that courts should avoid interfering with. Petitioner's counsel Mahfouz Bukhari countered that even policy decisions remain subject to judicial review if they prove unreasonable, discriminatory, or violate the law. Bukhari argued the enhanced toll on low-balance vehicles was arbitrary, excessive, and lacked lawful justification, calling the surcharge disproportionate and without a rational basis. The court has now directed the Ministry of Communications and other named respondents to submit written replies on the petition. Read also: Torkham Border Closure Cripples Landi Kotal Traders Background The National Highway Authority introduced the M-Tag system as an electronic toll collection mechanism to reduce congestion at motorway plazas. The June 2025 notification imposed a 50 percent higher toll on vehicles whose M-Tag accounts lacked sufficient funds at the time of passage, effectively penalizing motorists who failed to maintain adequate prepaid balances. The Judicial Activism Panel, a civil society organization focused on legal accountability, filed the current petition challenging the notification's legality. The case marks the first significant legal test of the surcharge policy since its implementation. Why It Matters The outcome could set a precedent for how far government agencies can go in penalizing motorists through toll structures without explicit legislative backing. If the court finds the surcharge unreasonable, it may force the National Highway Authority to revise its fee policies or seek formal legal authorization. For millions of daily motorway users, the ruling will determine whether they face an automatic penalty for low balances or receive more consumer-friendly alternatives such as grace periods or late-fee caps. The case also tests the limits of judicial review over administrative pricing decisions. What's Next The Ministry of Communications and other respondents must now file their written replies with the court, explaining the rationale behind the notification. The IHC will schedule further hearings after reviewing those submissions, potentially issuing a final verdict on the surcharge's legality in the coming months.