Suburban rail: Track doubling project put on backburner

Suburban rail: In January 2018, govt had approved doubling of two key routes

The slanging match over the delayed suburban rail project has put on the backburner two crucial doubling projects that can facilitate running of additional local trains.

In January 2018, the state government had approved works worth Rs 1,745 crore for giving a push to the suburban rail project. This included the doubling of the two existing lines -- Yeshwantpur-Channasandra and the Baiyappanahalli-Hosur -- which can play a huge role in enhancing the capacity and bringing more trains.

The projects are expected to benefit lakhs of people travelling to the IT corridors in Whitefield, Electronic City and surrounding areas where poor road connectivity has made commuting a nightmare.

The doubling and electrification of Baiyappanahalli-Hosur line was estimated to cost Rs 376 crore while the cost of work on Yeshwantpur-Channasandra was estimated at Rs 170 crore. The Channasandra line is expected to decongest the KSR Bengaluru Station by providing an alternative connection to the east through Lottegollarahalli.

Changing position

However, the state government changed its position within the next four months, stating that the doubling projects should be taken up under the special purpose vehicle (SPV) that will be set up to implement the full-fledged suburban project.

“The state government backed away from the project thinking that funding projects outside the SPV would increase its expenditure,” a government source said.

Asked about the delay, South Western Railway’s chief administrative officer K C Swami said the railways was focused on implementing the project and has sought the government’s cooperation.

“We have raised the matter with the state government. I have written letters stating that the project can be implemented under 50:50 cost sharing model. We have been able to convince senior officials in the government of its importance,” he said.

The government source, however, said there was apprehension that 50:50 cost sharing model may actually mean 20:20 equity and 60% loan model. “Seeking funds for the loan component has been difficult. This has made the state government reluctant,” he said.