In the letter to the Planning Commission Deputy Chairman, Montek Singh Ahluwalia, he stated that all further Metro projects operationalised under the BoT model would run into serious problems. To support his argument, Sreedharan cited the examples of the first route of Mumbai Metro and Hyderabad Metro projects. “Worldwide, the experience has been that no metro project has succeeded so far on BoT basis. There are many instances where metro projects started on BoT basis had to be finally taken over by the Government for public good,” the letter, a copy of which is available with Newsline, stated. The letter added, “Our sole example of Mumbai Metro has not still given us the required confidence in the BoT route. Even after agreeing to a viability gap funding (VGF) of Rs 650 crore plus 26 per cent equity, the project is moving at an extremely slow pace. The private sector efficiency expected from a BOT model is certainly absent.”

Earlier, the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) had mulled switching to the government-funded model, but later backtracked and proceeded on BoT model for its second corridor too.

A DMRC spokesperson confirmed that the letter was sent to the Planning Commission on September 11. “The intention of the letter was to draw attention to the fact that if a centralised form, a government-controlled system, is put in place, the advantages of a standardised system is possible, ultimately bringing the cost down,” the DMRC spokesperson told Newsline .

On the criticism by Sreedharan on the pace of Mumbai’s first metro corridor, a senior bureaucrat said, “It’s always been his argument since he claims government-funded models progress faster than PPP models.”

Meanwhile, senior Government officials in the state feel it’s extremely tough for a city like Mumbai to get Central funds for Metro projects unlike the case with the DMRC. “Mumbai never gets the treatment that New Delhi gets in terms of funding. Earlier, Sreedharan had come to Maharashtra and convinced everyone for a government funded model. Later, the Government of India declined to fund 20 per cent of the VGF and also refused to process the loan from a financial institution and asked us to go back to the public-private partnership (PPP) model,” a senior official, requesting anonymity, said. The official added that the state government, after the Centre’s declination, offered to fund another 20 per cent, but Sreedharan felt the Centre’s involvement was mandatory in the venture. “He (Sreedharan) argued that the Centre’s presence would isolate the project from local manipulation and interference.”

The Metropolitan Commissioner, Ratnakar Gaikwad, agrees with Sreedharan’s claim that Metro systems on BoT model haven’t been successful. “But there are also arguments against public-funded models that we don’t possess the technical expertise to implement such huge projects and the issue of time comes into the picture.”

He added, “We went ahead with the PPP model on the second metro corridor Charkop-Bandra-Mankhurd despite constituting the Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation as we had already started the tendering process and it would have been unprofessional (not to go ahead). For the model of implementation for the remaining corridors, the Government will take a call.”