The Supreme Court on Thursday asked the Chief Secretary of Tamil Nadu to appear before it after the State failed to file a compliance affidavit on highway safety directions issued earlier this year.
A Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta was informed that no one appeared on behalf of Tamil Nadu at the hearing, and that the State had not filed any affidavit detailing the steps taken to comply with the Court's April 13 order on highway safety.
"So far as State of Tamil Nadu is concerned no one is present on behalf of the said state. We direct Chief Secretary of State of Tamil Nadu to appear through video conferencing on next date," the Court said.
It clarified that the State would still be at liberty to file its compliance affidavit, along with an explanation for the delay, before the next hearing.
The Court was also informed that the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH) had also not filed their affidavits, despite the Solicitor General appearing on their behalf.
It then granted both ministries two weeks to comply, and cautioned that their secretaries would also be required to appear in person if they failed to file their affidavits.
The Court was hearing a suo motu case initiated after two highway accidents in November 2025, one in Rajasthan's Phalodi and another in Telangana's Rangareddy, which together claimed 34 lives.
In April, the Court had issued a detailed set of directions to strengthen highway safety. It included removal of encroachments, highway patrolling, identification of accident blackspots and deployment of emergency response infrastructure. Implementing authorities had been directed to file compliance affidavits within a stipulated period.
Today, Amicus Curiae Senior Advocate Atmaram Nadkarni told the Court that all States except Tamil Nadu filed compliance affidavits pursuant to the Court's. He added that some states, particularly Lakshadweep and hill states, may not be able to implement certain directions, such as creating service lanes, given their terrain.
"We can leave it to the highway authorities. If it's workable they'll do it, otherwise they may not," the Court observed.
Nadkarni flagged illegal night-time parking on highways as a major concern. He said that several measures, including RFID tags, had been proposed to address it, and that the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) has agreed to most of the suggestions.
The counsel appearing for NHAI told the Court that it has filed a detailed affidavit, indicating compliance with the Court's directions, including the constitution of patrolling teams and a policy circular for regular monitoring of highway stretches.
Nadkarni also informed the Court that despite directions to identify accident blackspots, most States and the NHAI have not responded.
The Court then directed the NHAI to share the necessary information with the Amicus Curiae within two weeks.
It listed the matter for further hearing on October 6.