Greater Bengaluru Authority takes over as BMLTA's role in urban mobility diminishes, experts warn of consequences
More than two years have passed since BMLTA was notified, yet the Act remains on paper, with no rules being framed or no members being formally appointed.
The Greater Bengaluru Governance Act (GBGA) positions the GBA as the apex body for urban governance, with binding authority over agencies like the Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation (BMTC), Bengaluru Metro Rail Corporation Limited (BMRCL), and other urban development agencies previously coordinated by the BMLTA.
Satya Arikutharam, urban mobility expert, said, 'The GBGA dilutes the core functions of BMLTA and makes it an ineffective institute even before its establishment. The city will miss the rigorous and independent review specified under Section 19 of BMLTA before approval for major urban transport projects.'
GBGA explicitly transfers several BMLTA provisions to the GBA. Under its planning functions, the GBA is designated as the 'Planning Authority' for the Greater Bengaluru area under the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961. This includes approving layouts and ensuring compliance with the master plan, roles that previously intersected with the BMLTA's efforts to align land use with transport planning. The GBA's oversight of the Bengaluru Metropolitan Planning Committee (BMPC), chaired by the Chief Minister, further consolidates its planning authority, potentially marginalising the BMLTA's input in metropolitan transport strategies.
The GBA, chaired by Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, is tasked with overseeing up to seven municipal corporations carved out of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP). Its functions span administrative control, urban planning, coordination of public authorities, and execution of major infrastructure projects, including mobility plans.
Major infrastructure projects, including vehicular tunnels proposed under the Brand Bengaluru initiative, upcoming Metro networks, and other urban infrastructure plans, require approval from BMLTA as specified under Section 19 of the Act. Under Section 19, the Act ensures that the authority will have the power to approve all major urban transport projects proposed from the perspective of consistency with the Comprehensive Mobility Plan and in a time-bound manner. It further states that no authority, agency, or department under the state government shall initiate any public, private, or public-private partnership project concerning urban mobility without obtaining prior approval of the authority.
BBMP, in its government order in September 2024, acknowledges the approval of BMLTA for an underground vehicular tunnel connecting Hebbal and Silk Board and other proposed elevated corridors.
Experts point out that with the establishment of a 'centralised' authority like GBA, it assumes significant responsibilities previously held by the BMLTA, such as formulating mobility plans and coordinating agencies like BMTC, BMRCL, Urban Development department and other agencies.
No clear sequence of process on land use: Experts
Arikutharam said that as per GBGA coordination between BMRCL and BMTC, the preparation of Mobility Plan, and formulation of major infrastructure projects – all core BMLTA functions – will now be undertaken by Greater Bengaluru Authority. 'This has serious negative consequences for sustainable urban mobility as GBA is designed for unfettered real estate development,' he pointed out.
Further, GBA integrates and supervises public authorities such as BMTC, BMRCL, and Bangalore Development Authority (BDA), issuing binding directions to streamline municipal and transport activities, and provisions that BMLTA was also entrusted with.
GBA also formulates and executes major infrastructural projects, including mobility-related plans (e.g., roads, tunnels), directly or through Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs), coming close on the heels of the functions of an autonomous BMLTA. BMLTA also has the power to issue directives to transport agencies to align operations with the CMP goals and sustainable mobility objectives.
The GBA's ability to establish Geographical Information Systems (GIS) and Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) also overlaps with the BMLTA's initiatives for technology-driven mobility solutions.
A Krishna Prashanth, member at CIVIC Bangalore, said, 'From a constitutional and legal standpoint BMLTA is essentially a planning body that helps build a transit-oriented development plan coupled with land use plan. When GBA assumes this role, the transport plan will not hold any value. The Greater Bengaluru Governance Act is unclear on the process of implementing transport and mobility projects. There is no clear sequence of process as to who will assess the land use, waste management, and other aspects.'
Secondly, he said, the previous Finance Commission mandated that BMLTA works in line with the Metropolitan Planning Committee (MPC), which is democratic and consultative. 'However, GBA neither allies with this nor any urban transport policy envisioned by the central government. Moreover, it is not clear where BMLTA sits in the large scheme of things under GBA,' he said.
However, an officer in the state government, on condition of anonymity, told The Indian Express that, 'BMLTA is not dropped, it will be formally constituted in the coming days. However, with GBA, a lot of the latter's functions align with those of BMLTA. Hence, there is a conflict of interest.'
According to Sandeep Anirudhan, convenor of Citizens' Agenda for Bengaluru, the Greater Bengaluru Governance Bill is poorly drafted and undermines critical planning institutions. 'The constitutionally mandated Metropolitan Planning Committee remains defunct after 33 years, and now its role is usurped by the new Greater Bengaluru Authority. Similarly, the BMLTA, meant to unify transport planning, is sidelined—its executive head is merely an invitee without voting rights. This pattern of creating and then undermining institutions spells disaster, as vested interests exploit the city, pushing Bengaluru into unplanned, unsustainable collapse,' Anirudhan remarked.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
29 minutes ago
- Economic Times
4,000 institutions under One Nation One Subscription scheme haven't received benefits: Par panel
Synopsis A parliamentary panel has raised concerns about the slow implementation of the One Nation One Subscription (ONOS) scheme, noting that a significant number of eligible institutions have yet to benefit. The committee has directed the Ministry of Education to provide updated information and accelerate the scheme's reach. Reuters Around 4,000 out of 7,008 eligible institutions under the One Nation One Subscription (ONOS) scheme of the Ministry of Education have not received its benefits, a parliamentary panel has flagged. The Standing Committee on Education, Women, Children, Youth and Sports, headed by Congress MP Digvijaya Singh, directed the furnishing of updated information on the current status of the ONOS' reach. "The Committee notes that the ONOS scheme has been approved and implemented. The Committee's recommendation had called for the accelerated implementation of the ONOS scheme. However, as the Committee noted in its 364th Report on Demand for Grants of the Higher Education Department (FY 24-25), about 4,000 of the 7,008 eligible institutions had still not received the benefits of the ONOS. "The Committee would direct the Department to provide updated information on the current status of the ONOS's reach, and provide an update on the steps taken to accelerate the scheme's implementation," the panel said in its report. The Committee also noted that the Anusandhan National Research Foundation (ANRF) Act, 2023 was brought out in letter and spirit but it has not been able to spend any of its budgeted funds for the previous financial year. "As per the provisions, an Executive Council was constituted wherein high-level strategic directions were given, performance monitored and implementation of the objectives of the Foundation was envisioned. However, in its discussions on the Demands for Grants of the Department of Higher Education in FY 2024-25, the Committee was informed that the ANRF had not been able to spend any of its budgeted funds for the previous financial year. "In this regard, the Committee needs to be apprised of the current status of the ANRF's functioning and further initiatives undertaken, if any," the report added.
Indian Express
29 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Open to review of RTI rules, says Karnataka Govt after legislators allege misuse
With several legislators cutting across party lines alleging misuse of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, the Karnataka Government said on Tuesday that it was open to reviewing the rules under the Act to prevent harassment and blackmailing of officials. The discussion on the RTI Act followed a question raised in the legislature by Congress MLA Mahantesh Koujalagi, who sought to know whether the Government would initiate action against those misusing the legislation by targeting officials. Responding on behalf of Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister H K Patil said the state government can amend rules framed under the Act. 'If we come to know about the misuse, we can take action. If harassment can be prevented by reviewing the rules and if it benefits the genuine RTI activists, we can discuss,' he said, noting that the Government would think about steps to limit the misuse of the RTI Act. Koujalagi suggested the Government hike RTI fees as a measure to curb the misuse, adding that RTI applications were being filed through proxies. 'Multiple applications are filed by some people just to harass officials. The cost per page is fixed at Rs 2. This is causing the problem. For BPL applicants, there is no fee for up to 100 pages. This is leading to a lot of misuse,' he said. Patil noted that the Government had blacklisted 26 RTI activists, apart from dismissing State Information Commissioner Ravindra Gurunath Dhakappa after the Lokayukta arrested him for allegedly taking a bribe from a blacklisted RTI applicant. BJP MLA Sunil Kumar alleged that some activists were not allowing any government work to be carried out. 'They collect the information and share it with the Lokayukta. Even public work is not happening because of these RTI activists. We should make some rules,' he said, suggesting a limit for the number of applications a person can file.
The Hindu
29 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Karnataka High Court criticises conduct of officials of Nirmithi Kendra in denying information under RTI Act
The High Court of Karnataka has criticised the conduct of officials of the Nirmithi Kendra in attempting to suppress transparency by claiming that the Right to Information (RTI) Act is not applicable to the kendra, even though it is sponsored and controlled by the State government through the Rural Development and Panchayat Raj (RDPR) Department. The court has also imposed a cost of ₹50,000 on the Nirmithi Kendra, Chitradurga, for denying information under the RTI Act by claiming that it is not a public authority but a private society. Justice Suraj Govindaraj passed the order, while dismissing a petition filed by the project director of Nirmithi Kendra, Chitradurga, who had questioned the State Information Commission's 2017 direction for providing information sought by some persons under the RTI Act. The court noted that the government had set up Nirmithi Kendras for developing low-cost technology alternatives for rural housing, and its control and supervision is under many top officials of the zilla panchayats and the district administrations belonging to the cadre of the Indian Administrative Service and the Karnataka Administrative Service, Besides, these kendras are being funded by HUDCO, which is a government entity, and contracts are given to the kendra by the State government, and there is a preference for these kendras to carry out works of the government, the court pointed out. A perusal of Section 2(h) of the RTI Act would indicate that it is not only funding, but also control, which would have to be considered to determine whether it is a public authority or not, the court said, while pointing out that not only the funding for these kendras is provided by the government, but the works carried out by them are also considered government's works. 'The attempt made by the officers of Nirmithi Kendra to suppress such transparency leaves much to be desired and does not inspire confidence. By way of such conduct, the Nirmithi Kendra, Chitradurga, has successfully avoided disclosure of information and details,' the court said, while declaring that Nirmithi Kendras as public authorities under the provisions of the RTI Act.
