According to an RTI, the Maharashtra government recently approved an acquisition agreement that has been signed between the Mumbai Metro 1 (Blue Line) and the Mumbai Metropolitan Regional Development Authority (MMRDA).
This agreement is expected to result in a loss of INR 1,600 crore for the state exchequer. Before granting any more consent, the Mumbai-based RTI activist insisted that public consultation should take place, citing the MMRDA's alleged refusal to provide papers. The first Metro project in the city, between Versova-Ghatkopar, was established in 2007 using the build-operate-transfer (BOT) methodology. It has been the focus of disputes among the participants in the joint venture.
Reliance Infrastructure's shareholding was estimated at INR 4,000 crore, based on a study recently approved by the state cabinet. The paper was written by retired IAS official and former chief secretary Johny Joseph. A month after the RTI application was filed, MMRDA Deputy Transport Engineer Gajanan Sasane allegedly told RTI activist Anil Galgali that the records could not be provided since they were available only for business purposes. Galgali had requested a copy of the report.
In January 2023, Gajanan Sasane told Anil Galgali that the acquisition procedure was underway and that updates would be provided when it was finished, affirmed the RTI activist. Reliance Infrastructure has asked MMRDA to purchase Mumbai Metro 1 by submitting an offer in July 2020, according to records made available under the RTI Act at the time. The shareholding structure of the first Metro contract in Mumbai is 70:30. The Metro project concluded with a total cost of INR 2,355 crore.
The RTI activist said that former chief secretary Johny Joseph, then Additional Chief Secretary Bhushan Gagrani, and Executive Director R Ramana of Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation Limited (MMRCL) were members of the Internal Study Group (ISG) that the Maharashtra government constituted.
He said that on March 7, 2007, MMRDA and MMOPL [Mumbai Metro One Private Limited] inked a concession agreement based on a public-private partnership form.
Anil Galgali claimed that the MMRDA had ignored the opinions of regular people on such a significant issue and that the report was not being disseminated or made available to the public even after the cabinet gave its assent. After all, how was the INR 4,000 crore valuation determined? The public can learn about this only when the report is made available to the public.
Given that MMRDA and MMOPL had not been on good terms, such an arrangement required legal guidance. Only after making the reports available to the public and soliciting feedback from them should the government authorise this costly transaction, he said.
Share
Tweet
