Bengaluru metro commuters continue to grapple with the aftermath of a significant fare hike earlier this year, highlighting systemic issues in cost calculation and public transparency. While the Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited (BMRCL) attributed the increase to technical formula application, independent analysis suggests a major miscalculation amplified the fare surge, disproportionately affecting nearly 80% of daily travellers.
The Fare Fixation Committee (FFC) report, now publicly available, confirms that BMRCL requested a 105.15% fare hike, based on a formula originally developed by Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC). This formula estimates staff, energy, maintenance, and administration costs against historical Consumer Price Index data. However, the BMRCL’s application of the formula introduced a critical error: maintenance and administrative costs from 2016-17 were divided by 2017-18 route kilometres, exaggerating per-kilometre costs by more than 366% relative to current figures. Actual audited operational costs increased by 39.6% over the same period. Energy cost estimates also contributed to the distortion. While unit energy costs decreased due to concessional tariffs, BMRCL reported a 33.72% increase by factoring in unspecified additional components. Combined with depreciation and debt servicing elements, this resulted in a request that the FFC moderated to an average 51.55% fare increase. Yet, fares for the bulk of commuters rose by over 70%, far above the actual cost escalation.
Experts note that the FFC failed to challenge the suitability of the DMRC formula for Bengaluru’s operational context, overlooking historical inefficiencies, loan management gaps, and limited non-farebox revenue strategies at BMRCL. Unlike Delhi, where CPI-based adjustments sufficed, Bengaluru’s formula application compounded errors, raising affordability concerns among daily users. Public transport advocates argue that BMRCL’s approach effectively transfers the financial burden of construction delays and operational inefficiencies to commuters. The Bangalore Urban Transport and Infrastructure Fund contributes significantly to metro expansion and debt servicing, yet fares continue to rise without reflecting these external supports. Analysts stress that a more transparent, formula-consistent fare revision capped at 51.55%—aligned with audited O&M costs—would have better balanced financial sustainability with commuter affordability.
With the Pink and Blue metro lines still under development, stakeholders recommend freezing fares at the revised benchmark until full network expansion is completed. Doing so could ensure equitable access, reduce public frustration, and reinforce Bengaluru’s commitment to sustainable, commuter-friendly urban transport. The controversy underscores the broader challenges faced by Indian metro operators in balancing operational costs, fare policy, and transparency, calling for rigorous oversight to prevent disproportionate financial impact on daily users.
Also Read: Navi Mumbai Airport And Metro 3 Launch Delayed To October Due Heavy Rain
