Bombay High court’s question mark over elevated Metro

Mumbai: The Bombay High court on Tuesday questioned the Maharashtra government's decision to construct elevated Metro lines across the Mumbai city.

The court said it did not understand why the State and the Mumbai Metropolitan Regional Development Authority (MMRDA) didn't see that the slabs used to construct the elevated Metro lines would "give way after 40-50 years due to vibrations," and carrying out repairs would take years.

"World over, we have not seen elevated Metro lines running across a city. They are usually underground or run on the ground. Can you imagine how long it would take to repair the elevated line slabs and what will happen to the traffic situation in such time?" a bench of Chief Justice Pradeep Nandrajog and Justice Bharati Dangre said.

"Flyovers can be shut for repairs for some time and an alternative route can be provided in the interim, but what will you do about an entire Metro line?" the court asked.

It directed the state Advocate General Ashutosh Kumbhakoni to ask the authorities concerned to give some thought to the subject.

The court was hearing a petition filed by the MMRDA, seeking permission to clear some mangroves along the proposed Metro lines between Dahisar and Mankhurd areas, and another line near Belapur.

Over elevated Metro

The advocate general informed the court that as per the current plan, only one of all the proposed metro lines in the city would be underground.

According to an RTI reply received by Anil Galgali from the MMRDA, the underground metro line costs three times more than the elevated one.

Going into specifics, the MMRDA had said the construction cost for an elevated Metro would be about Rs250 to Rs300 crore, while the cost of the underground line would go up by almost three times.

(For all the latest News, Mumbai, Entertainment, Cricket, Business and Featured News updates, visit Free Press Journal. Also, follow us on Twitter and Instagram and do like our Facebook page for continuous updates on the go)

Free Press Journal