Lane system must before razing toll plaza: Top cop

GURGAON: Police commissioner Navdeep Singh Virk has asked the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) not to go ahead with the demolition of the Sirhaul toll plaza, till a lane system is put in place on the expressway. Otherwise, it is likely to cause unregulated traffic movement, he said.
NHAI had recently directed the concessionaire, Millennium City Expressways Pvt Ltd (MCEPL), to raze the structure within three months, to ease the traffic chaos caused by the now defunct toll booths.
The city’s traffic police, however, fear that if the toll structure is dismantled, vehicles that are currently segregated into lanes, would move in a haphazard manner and lead to accidents. Cops said the physical structure helps divert traffic moving towards Ambience mall, from that going towards Shankar Chowk and further, into separate lanes. They said an alternative system is needed before the toll booth is razed.
Virk spoke to NHAI officials on Friday and asked them to reconsider their plan. “The toll structure works like a lane divider by segregating vehicles. ,” said Virk.
The concessionaire has already started working out the modalities to carry out the demolition. “We’ve called for sealed quotations from contractors and will finalize a name by March 10 at our board meeting,” said Raghuraman S, CEO of MCEPL.
NHAI officials said although the concessionaire has been given a May 10 deadline, it would take a month to raze the 32-lane toll plaza. “We could call the tender and assign the job to a contractor, but that would have raised the risk and cost for the concessionaire. MCEPL would have had to pay 25% more than the cost of dismantling the structure, apart from a penalty at Rs 10,000 a day. But as the concessionaire agreed to do the job itself, so we do not plan to impose any penalty or damages,” said Ashok Kumar Sharma, project director of NHAI.
The Sirhaul toll plaza had ceased operations on February 19, 2014, following a Delhi high court order. The physical structure was not razed as MCEPL argued it was the responsibility of the previous concessionaire, DGCL. The highway authority maintained that it was the MCEPL’s responsibility.