Temporary relief for commuters but state-Centre tussle on who controls prices goes on
The 5% hike in Namma Metro fares, slated to come into effect from Monday, has been put on hold following directions from the Union government.
The pause will last “until further orders” and is subject to review by the BMRCL board, the public transporter said on Sunday.
The volte-face came after days of intense public backlash and political bickering over who controls the fares of Bengaluru’s popular metro network: Karnataka or Centre?
Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited (BMRCL) had announced the hike — by Rs 1-5 across all 10 fare zones — under annual automatic revision recommended by the Fare Fixation Committee (FFC), whose report is binding on it. The minimum was to be Rs 11 and the maximum Rs 95.
The hike was timed exactly a year after the fares had been increased by an average of 51.55% before discounts and 46.39% after discounts, making the Bengaluru metro one of the most expensive in the country.
As public discontent grew and Opposition BJP leaders slammed the hike, Chief Minister Siddaramaiah urged the Centre to reconsider the fare levels and explore mechanisms to moderate or rationalise them.
He maintained that the fares were determined by an independent FFC constituted solely by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs. Neither the state nor BMRCL has the legal authority to override or disregard these recommendations, he had noted.
Bangalore South MP, L S Tejasvi Surya, and Leader of the Opposition in the Legislative Assembly, R Ashoka, subsequently announced that the Centre had put the hike on hold.
Wearing a T-shirt printed with excerpts from the FFC report, Surya visited the RV Road metro station on Sunday and stated that the hike had been deferred.
The BMRCL, however, maintained it had not received official communication and that the hike would go ahead as announced. As suspense lingered, the BMRCL received directions from the ministry on Sunday evening, asking to defer the hike.
Well-placed sources said the ministry’s directive could support the state’s claim that it has no role on the fares and that the Centre has the final say.
Surya, however, disagreed.
Speaking to DH, he pinned the blame on the state.
“The scheme of fare fixation is clear. It is the state that requests the constitution of the FFC. The committee considers submissions from the state and BMRCL, and then decides the fare,” he stated.
“They were the ones who asked for such a high increase, citing weak finances and the inability to continue the Shadow Cash Support (SCS) that earlier governments were providing. Because of this, the fares increased, and the recommendation is binding. That is how this problem started.
“What the minister (Union Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs Manohar Lal Khattar) has done now is to exercise ministerial oversight and ask for the hike to be put on hold temporarily until a solution is found.”
The BJP MP said the chief minister had last year asked for a reduction in fares. “If today they say fares are controlled only by the union government, then what authority did the CM exercise earlier?”
He demanded that the CM write to the Centre seeking reconstitution of the FFC.
“We are not opposing reasonable fare hikes. Operational costs have gone up, and nobody is saying fares should remain at 2010 or 2015 levels. But public transport must remain affordable. Fare revision should be done in a scientific manner by the FFC, in consultation with commuters and experts,” Surya added.
Independent mobility expert Satya Arikutharam, who has researched the issue, said the BMRCL acted in “bad faith” throughout.
“It made implementation errors and moved to an altogether different system while correcting them. Fares are now based on stations travelled as opposed to the earlier distance travelled,” he noted.
