ORDER : In view of the fact that the issue involved in both the writ petitions is one and the same, these writ petitions are taken up together and disposed of by a common order. 2. After some elaborate arguments made by both sides, both parties fairly conceded that the matter is squarely covered by the Honourable Division Bench judgment of this Court in S. Joel Vs. Union Government of India, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, South Block, Raisina Hill, New Delhi-110 101 and others reported in (2015) 4 MLJ 257 and my judgment in W.P. (MD) Nos. 11739 of 2013 batch in the matter of The Chairman, Trichy Engineering College, Trichy-621 132 and four others Vs. The Project Director, National Highways Authority of India, PIU, Trichy and two others as it relates to collection of fee in the Toll Plaza. Therefore, these writ petitions as such are not maintainable. 2. At the same time, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that by relying the Honourable Division Bench judgment of this Court cited supra in paragraph 20', when a person is living within an area of toll plaza a concession rate is given including the bus operator. The paragraph 20' of the above judgment reads as follows: "20. As pointed out earlier Schedule C of the Concession Agreement provides for adjustment and relocations of Toll Plaza and in exercise of such power under the agreement, the exercise has been done. NHAI in their counter has stated that in terms of Schedule G para (iv) of the Concession Agreement, there is a provision for discounted fee for the residents, employees of Establishment/Industrial units, self employed persons/businessmen and establishment/Industrial units located within 10 or 20 km from the Toll Plaza. The residents and those residing within 10 kms fall under category-I and those within the 10 kms to 20 kms fall under category-II and the discounted rate is Rs. 150 per month and Rs.300 per month respectively. Further, there is a provision for discounted fee for school buses and local transport operators. In the light of the stand taken by the NHAI, we are not inclined to accept the contention of the petitioner that public interest has been affected on account of the location of the second Toll Plaza". 3. Therefore, the petitioners are having the College within the operative distance of three kilometers from the Toll Plaza. In the light of the stand taken by the NHAI, we are not inclined to accept the contention of the petitioner that public interest has been affected on account of the location of the second Toll Plaza". 3. Therefore, the petitioners are having the College within the operative distance of three kilometers from the Toll Plaza. Therefore, they may be considered as a special category seeking for concession as contemplated earlier. 4. The learned Counsel appearing for the respondents submits that first of all, they make application and they may register the vehicle for concession and after that only, the respondents will consider as per the Collection of user fee, the National Highways of India, (Determination of Rates and Collection) Rules, 2008. 5. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents. 6. Therefore, if any application is filed by the petitioners, the respondents will consider and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law. If at all the any representation is made by the petitioner seeking for any concession under the National Highways of India, (Determination of Rates and Collection) Rules, 2008, the respondents are directed to consider the applications of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders on the same on merits and in accordance with law, if they are eligible under law. 7. With the above direction, these writ petitions are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.