insight

may be recalled that the consortium that Maytas, Hyderabad Metro and has two Hyderabad-based real estate com- panies, Navbharat and Maytas, bagged the Politics of Real Estate the contract for the Rs 12,132 crore project by not seeking any viability gap funding (VGF) and also offered a royalty of C Ramachandraiah Rs 30,311 crore to the GoAP. In this c­onsortium, the dominant player is In the 10 days since the revelation “Earlier industrialists and then defence M­aytas, the real estate firm of the sons of of the massive fraud at Satyam, contracts financed political parties. Now the information technology major, Satyam there has been much speculation real estate does, especially in the states Computers. A new company, Maytas because chief ministers have easier access M­etro Limited (MML), was floated by the that the holes in the software to it. The kickbacks are huge” – Charles successful consortium and signed the company’s books were caused by Correa (Interview, Times of India, contract­ with GoAP on 19 September 2008. the promoters’ links with Maytas, 10 September 2008). The HMRP comprises three routes for a the infrastructure company that length of 71.16 km: Line-1 from Miyapur to 1 introduction L B Nagar (29.87 km); Line-2 from in recent years has become the J­ubilee Bus Station (JBS) to Falaknuma favourite of the government he shocking revelation on 7 Janu- (14.78 km); and Line-3 from Nagole to of Andhra Pradesh. ary that Satyam Computer Services Shilparamam (26.51 km). The entire This article puts under the Thad been cooking its books for project is an elevated corridor along the years has caused an earthquake in the central meridian of roads with two paral- magnifying lens the award I­ndian corporate sector. Satyam’s revela- lel tracks of rails, and 66 stations which in 2008 of the massive tions turn the spotlight back on Maytas, will have long additional platforms with Rs 12,000 crore contract to the infrastructure group held by the pro- staircases, escalators, lifts, etc. The elevat- Maytas to build and operate the moters of Satyam. Indeed, it was Satyam’s ed track will be at a height of 35 to 50 ft, at proposed takeovers of Maytas that set in some places as high as 60-70 ft in the Hyderabad Metro. motion the events that have led to the near thickly built core city. The metro corridors collapse of Satyam itself. Was the selected will have to cross several existing flyovers bidder for the Hyderabad Metro Rail Project and also intersect each other at three (HMRP) favoured even before the final p­laces. Huge shopping complexes and t­endering was over? Does it point to a malls are likely to come up at several metro “­political scam”? The managing director stations. The cost of this project has al- of Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC), ready doubled in three years from about and prime consultant to HMRP until re- Rs 6,000 crore to over Rs 12,000 crore dur- cently, E Sree­dharan, thinks so. He made ing 2005-08. It is also likely to face many several such scathing remarks in a letter hurdles in land acquisition, litigations, to Deputy Chairman of the Planning Com- and traffic problems, etc. With all these mission, Montek Singh Ahluwalia, on 11 factors likely to lead to about 50% cost September 2008 and even more explicitly escalation in the coming years, the in another article later (Sreedharan 2008). project cost may reach upwards of Shaken by the exposure from its own con- Rs 18,000 crore and may well rise from sultant, the HMRP officials reacted strong- the estimated Rs 171 crore now to Rs 250 ly and also in a belittling manner, crore per km. This project has been touted d­emanded unconditional apology, and as the biggest private-public partnership threatened to file a defamation suit. Sreed- (PPP) in India though practically it has haran refused to apologise. The DMRC and now become a totally private funded government of Andhra Pradesh (GoAP) project. This is probably the largest infra- parted ways. structure project ever undertaken in C Ramachandraiah ([email protected]) Sreedharan was reacting to a major policy H­yderabad’s history. is with the Centre for Economic and Social shift in the government of India (GoI) to It will result in large-scale demolition of Studies, Hyderabad. He is also with the operationalise all future urban metro projects buildings, including of the State Archives, Citizens for a Better Public Transport under the build-operate-transfer (BOT) and defacement of historic heritage pre- in Hyderabad. model solely under the private sector. It cincts on a scale the city has never

36 january 17, 2009 EPW Economic & Political Weekly insight w­itnessed before. In the next section some HMR authorities. The faculty in the depart- day and night times, respectively. Lakhs of serious concerns on the implications of ments of transport engineering, Jawahar- middle class people are living close by on this project are discussed. The third lal Nehru Technological University,­ Hydera- either side of the proposed routes. Simi- s­ection deals with the selection of the bad, and National Institute of Technology, larly, silence zone areas like hospitals and b­idder and Sreedharan’s objections. Cer- Warangal were totally excluded in conduct- educational institutions where the pre- tain features of the concession agreement ing studies for this project.3 scribed noise levels are 50dB(A) during are dealt with in Section 4 followed by the day and 45dB(A) at night will cause concluding remarks in the last section. 2.2 security and Heritage s­erious disturbances. Even in industrial Line-1 will pass by the Andhra Pradesh areas the maximum permissible noise 2 Project Issues Secretariat and Legislative Assembly l­evel is 75dB(A) during day time.7 The This section discusses some of the major buildings with the rail corridor at 45 ft “stringent noise standards mandated” to implications of the project. along with two stations which are likely the BOT developer are also not in conform- pose a serious security risk. In Delhi, the ity with the noise standards of Central 2.1 no Transparency elevated metro rail goes underground Pollution Control Board (CPCB): 60dB(A) Till the bidder was selected in late July near the Central Secretariat (and in Luty- for hospital zones, 50-70 dB(A) for resi- 2008, the HMR officials refused to provide ens Delhi) due to security concerns and dential areas, and 75 dB(A) for business detailed project reports (DPRs) even under the need to protect the heritage. It was felt and commercial areas (Counter Affidavit the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 there that an elevated corridor would have 18483 of 2008). There are about 320 places on the ground that they contain informa- marred the beauty of the city. Keeping in (51 schools, 96 colleges, 118 hospitals, 54 tion which have high commercial value view the ancient monuments of heritage religious places, and the Secunderabad and that “the BOT tender process is still value between the Central Secretariat and Courts and AP Judicial Academy all falling on”.1 Several applications made under the Mehrauli, in Delhi the metro has been in the silence zone category on either side RTI Act by different applicants have not taken underground.4 The two corridors of of the three metro routes.8 They also in- even been replied to before the bidding the elevated metro rail in Bangalore are clude some of the most important public was over. The officials have refused to going underground for 6.76 km near the hospitals and educational and research share information despite several de- areas around Vidhana Soudha, which too i­nstitutions in Hyderabad like the Nizam mands made by political parties, intellec- is of high heritage and of historic impor- Institute of Medical Sciences, Gandhi tuals and civil society groups to get the tance.5 The DMRC prepared DPRs for the Medical College and Hospital, O­smania documents and initiate an informed Bangalore metro. Heritage buildings re­ Medical College, Vivek Vardhini College, d­ebate. Information was provided selec- present and remind residents of the past Government Maternity Hospital, etc. The tively after the bidding was over. A public history, culture, architecture and political elevated metro rail will run within 20-30 interest litigation was filed in August 2008 systems. Hyderabad has a number of her- metres in many areas, sometimes as close in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh (Writ itage buildings. The metro corridors are as 10-15 metres, from buildings in some of Petition No 18483 of 2008). going to deface about 27 of the 137 listed the thickly populated areas. The Noise The HMRP is taken up under the Andhra heritage precincts of the city. Further, they Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, Pradesh Municipal Tramways (Construc- are also going to affect about 44 buildings 2000 of the CPCB are applicable up to 100 tion, Operation and Maintenance) Ordi- that are identified as having potential metres. The high levels of permissible nance, 2008 (now an Act). As per Section/ h ­eritage value. 6 The pedestrian shopping noise by HMRP violate the existing subsections 3 and 4 of this Act, upon re- areas and historical landmarks like Sultan laws on noise and adversely affect the ceiving a request from a municipality, the Bazar and Badi Chawdi will have to be quality of environment and hence the GoAP should publish an order/notice in- d­emolished in a big way for metro rail right to life. viting objections/suggestions from public, construction. These are also high-density and publish a final notification after duly residential areas with shops on the ground 2.4 Environmental Clearance taking into consideration those objections/ floor and residences above. As prime con- The Environment and Social Impact suggestions. The GoAP has denied the sultant to HMRP, the DMRC has not shown A­ssessment (E&SIA) Report for Lines-1 and 2 public this right to know by taking shelter a similar sensitivity to Hyderabad com- done in June 2003 is known to have used under Section 5 which says that the gov- pared to Delhi and Bangalore on security outdated methods, made unsubstantiated ernment may enter into an agreement or and heritage issues. averments, did no study of the environ- any other arrangement through open bid- ment impact, and did not comply with the ding process for any municipal area.2 Thus, 2.3 high Noise Levels guidelines of the United Nations Environ- the GoAP has kept the options of inform- The noise level of up to 85 dB(A) that may ment Programme or Ministry of Environ- ing the public and also denying the right be generated by elevated metro rail (as in- ment and Forests (MoEF), GoI.9 With to know depending upon who initiates the dicated by HMR officials in a presentation) so many implications for environment, project! The occasional briefings to the media would seriously hamper the peace of resi- s­ecurity and heritage, and despite being a and a few official gatherings are sought to dential areas where noise levels should huge infrastructure project, it is claimed be passed off as public c­onsultations by not exceed 55 dB(A) and 50 dB(A) in the that the metro rail projects are exempted

Economic & Political Weekly EPW january 17, 2009 37 insight from environmental clearances by the and r­ehabilitation, do not appear as a to make its bid viable but also to get more GoI as a “deliberate exclusion”. The MoEF cost at all. value for its properties by providing con- first included “MRTS in Metro Cities” Maytas has no previous experience of nectivity. The government seems to have for mandatory environmental clearance building and operating a metro rail. It got agreed to give the company the opportu- in the Draft EIA Notification dated 15 Sep- eligibility for bidding because of its tie-up nity to expand routes and therefore addi- tember 2005 but excluded them in the with Ital-Thai, which was involved in the tional land (Srinivas 2008). In recent Final Notification dated 14 September construction of the Bangkok skytrain. After years, the Government Order No 111 meant 2006. The only basis for their exclusion bagging the contract, the new company to for protection of Osmansagar and Himay- appears to be a letter addressed by construct and run the HMRP was named atsagar reservoirs around Hyderabad has E Sreedharan on 14 November­ 2005 to the MML. The share of Ital-Thai seems to be come under threat from real estate lobbies joint secretary, MoEF requesting for their only 5% in MML. The originally intended eyeing lands in their catchment areas, exclusion on the ground that they are share of Ital-Thai in this consortium is not which are located closer to the new environment-friendly.10 known. In tune with the present GoAP’s airport and the outer ring road (ORR). controversial (and scandalous) policy of Indications are that the threat has become 3 A ‘Settlement’? allocating large tracts of land to corporate more serious now. The feeling that this Was the selection of Maytas a political companies, Maytas has been trying to get selection of the bidder looks like a s­ettlement of some sort? 2,500 acres for Machilipatnam port. Riding­ “settlement”12 in the context of land on the positive image of the information allocations, real estate and politics in 3.1 Maytas and Real Estate techno­logy sector and (before the scandal- Andhra Pradesh (as in Charles Correa’s Five consortia with a combination of Indian ous revelations in January 2009) of Satyam observation), and of the future plans of and foreign companies (Reliance, GVK, NCC, Computers, in a short time, Maytas has Maytas gains strength in view of the Gammon; and Alstom, Bombardier, Sie- emerged as an important real estate company o­bjections raised by Sreedharan and the mens, etc) qualified for financial bidding with ventures in hundreds of acres (special presence of several pro-Maytas clauses in for this project. One of them was the economic zones) on the outskirts of Hydera- the concession agreement. Navbharat-Maytas-ItalThai­ (ITD-Thailand)- bad. Maytas advertises its “most high-value IL&FS (Infrastracture Financing and Leas- gated communities”, “a world unlike any 3.2 the Favours ing Services) consortium, which was se- you’ve ever known”, “modern workspaces for E Sreedharan argues that the BOT model, lected as the “successful bidder” on 23 July global work styles where shopping malls, recommended only for Hyderabad, was 2008. Instead of seeking any viability gap schools, medical facilities, recreational cen­ expected to succeed due to the low cost of funding (VGF), this consortium has offered tres will be essential features”, “designed construction (since no tunnelling is in- to pay a royalty of Rs 30,311 crore to the for contented and fulfilled communities”. volved), and the huge ridership (passenger state government: Rs 511 crore before the Maytas is now believed to be looking at traffic) expected. Even then, 40% of the ninth year and Rs 1,750 crore per year expanding the metro rail project not just cost would be needed as VGF to make it from the 18th to the 34th year. The project has a lease period of 35 years, including Figure: Existing and Proposed Rail Lines of Hyderabad Metro construction time, with a possible exten- Medchal sion by 25 years. Of the remaining three Outer Ring Road consortia, only the Nagarujuna-Siemens (under construction) group did not seek the VGF and also of- fered Rs 250 crore to the state government towards its equity share. The other two Patancheru consortia sought the VGF. The royalty Miyapur (“negative subsidy”) of Rs 30,311 crore Line-1 was equated as net present value of Lingampally SN JBS Moulali Rs 1,250 crore by discounting at prime Shilparamam Ghatekesar lending rate of 13.5% prevailing on the Line-3 Secunderabad date of financial bidding. On the face of it, Nampally this financial model seems very attractive Nagole because the bidder has not asked for VGF Line-2 LB Nagar and instead is paying a “huge” royalty. It Rail line (existing): Malakpet Falaknuma was even said that Hyderabad is going to New rail line (proposed Hayatnagar get the metro rail “for free”, at “zero cost by CBPTH): to governments and city administrations”.11 Proposed metro rail routes: Shamshabad The huge economic and social costs that thousands of the affected people pay, Figure not to scale. and the huge costs of land acquisition SN – Sanathnagar

38 january 17, 2009 EPW Economic & Political Weekly insight work. Later the GoAP offered 269 acres of c ­onjecture ( The Hindu, 24 July). How is it huge amounts of taxes on the real estate prime land in the city to the BOT operator, that M­ontek Singh Ahluwalia wrote to the business of the MML. Further, the benefits which the DMRC had not recommended. prime minister on 25 July itself, even under the AP Infrastructure Development Sreedharan further says that “when we b­efore the “successful bidder” was an- Enabling Act, 2001 should also be made discovered that the Metro lines were al- nounced, citing Hyderabad’s experience available to this project. tered and extended13 (DMRC had objected of getting a “negative subsidy” and that The Competing Facility (CF) clause not to this) to areas where the successful BOT they “are engaged in pushing for a only enables MML to exercise monopoly on operator had extensive private land hold- similar e­ffort for other metropolitan passengers in the three routes but also ings…we began to feel that the tendering cities”.14 Does not the Planning Commis- empowers it to levy a higher tariff during process was clearly not transparent sion’s “pushing for a similar effort” indi- peak hours. The government has given up enough and we withdrew from our role as cate that it was aware of the outcome of its responsibility to improve or provide prime consultants”. To the argument of the bidding in H­yderabad even before? other modes of transportation to the pub- the GoAP that two senior officers of DMRC Otherwise, how does one push for a model lic in future in the metro routes. The CF were in the committee for evaluation of the even before its very nature is known? should not be introduced until the 25th bids and that throughout the bid process U­ltimately, does it not mean that the year. If introduced after that, the conces- DMRC’s senior officers were closely advis- m­odel of negative subsidy adopted by sion period will exceed by the period equal ing GoAP, Sreedharan reacted emphati- Maytas was known to the powers that be to the duration from the start of CF and cally: “DMRC was not involved in the pre- and the whole process of global bidding the 35th year. Further, the fares in the CF qualification of tenders nor in the selection was a formality for official sanction and should be higher by a minimum of 25% of the BOT operator”. He was also categori- legitimacy, which is now coming into the compared to the rail system. This also cal that the alterations to the DPR open as a farce? means that the AP State Road Transport which “benefited a particular party” may Corporation (APSRTC) will not be allowed lead to a political scandal later if enquired 4 A ‘Model’ Sell-Out? in the future to introduce modern buses into by a successive government. He Some of the clauses in the Concession for public comfort on these routes. This wants standardisation and indigenisation Agreement (CA) for HMRP signed between clause sounds the death knell to the of metro rails in the country for a signifi- the GoAP and MML (“the Concessionaire”) A ­PSRTC in the city where it is earning pro­ cant reduction in cost, which is not possi- further strengthen the argument that this fits, carrying about three million passen- ble if each metro is executed by a private is more a real estate project and the GoAP gers daily, and where it needs strengthen- agency. He argues that the Hyderabad has been more eager to favour Maytas ing. The objective of providing cheap mass model of BOT (without VGF) was possible than protect public interest in this PPP.15 public transport is negated and people will because of large tracts of lands available Real Estate Development (RED) is included be forced to pay higher tariff for travel by around the city (a “sweetener” to the as a part of the rail system by definition the metro rail.16 BOT developer) which other cities that along with the rail-related infrastructure. The most glaring and blatantly pro- are going for a m­etro do not have. Thus, The total land available to the concession- Maytas clause is provided for in extension he strongly advocates the Delhi model aire is 269 acres at Miyapur (99 acres), of the lease period based on a shortfall of of metro rail in the country (as a joint Falaknuma (17 acres) and Nagole (96 traffic. By 1 October 2021 the traffic is esti- venture between state and central acres), and 57 acres at 34 metro stations in mated to be 2.75 crore passenger kilo­ governments). the core city. If the earmarked lands are metres (PKM), i e, about 26.76 lakh passen- Questions that ask for answers are: As a not made available by the government, gers per day. If the actual traffic falls short prime consultant, if DMRC had objected to a­lternative sites of comparable size and by 1%, the concession period will be altering and extension of the metro routes, potential should be earmarked for RED. i­ncreased by 1.5% (of 35 years) to a maxi- then who recommended such changes? Ten per cent space of the metro stations mum of 20% (i e, seven years). The actual Since these changes were made much can also be used for real estate. There is traffic for that date shall be derived by b­efore the bidder was selected, does it not no clause which says that more lands will traffic sampling, which should be done a indicate that the GoAP and the “selected” not be given in future. If read with Section year before. First of all, there is no BOT developer were hand-in-glove? It may 17.2(a) of the AP Tramways Ordinance, s­cientific basis for estimating these traffic be noted that the bids were opened on 2008 mentioned earlier, which clearly em- f­igures. When everything is supposed to 23 July and the official announcement was powers the “tramway operator” to “ac- be computerised, why should there be a made by GoAP only on 28 July 2008 giving quire, hold and dispose of all kinds of sample study a year before? It is a well rise to a lot of speculation in between. properties, movable and immovable”, it known fact that even after five years the Since the afternoon of the bidding “all the becomes clear that Maytas may resort to Delhi metro is not carrying even 30% of excitement that the project would reach a acquisition of lands in future in the name the projected ridership (Mohan 2008). decisive stage went kaput once lips got of the metro rail project. Local taxes or The lease period of 35 years gets automati- sealed” and what happened after the charges should not be levied on the RED, cally extended to 42 years with this clause. o­fficials concerned went to the chief which means the Greater Hyderabad With a possible extension of the lease m­inister’s office remains a matter of M­unicipal Corporation (GHMC) will lose p­eriod by 25 years, the city, its lands, and

Economic & Political Weekly EPW january 17, 2009 39 insight the future of the commuters will be in Hyderabad, and if the apex planning body 6 According to a survey by Heritage Cell of Forum for a Better Hyderabad, a civil society the hands of the Maytas real estate com- is “pushing for a similar effort” in other organisation. pany for almost 67 years, that is more cities, the policymakers appear to be 7 Based on ambient noise standards of the Central Pollution Control Board (Source: www.cpcb.nic. than the period since India’s independence very keen to hand over the big cities to in accessed on 29 May 2008). till date! real estate companies and facilitate corpo- 8 Based on a quick survey along the proposed metro rail routes on 1 June 2008 by a team of the C­itizens The GoAP appears to be deliberately rate landgrab to the detriment of the for Better Public Transport in Hyderabad willing to pay a penal amount to Maytas. public welfare. (CBPTH). 9 Cerana Foundation, a well-known environmental One of the main obligations of the GoAP is By signing the CA without even issuing consultancy organisation in Hyderabad, made a to procure the site (i e, all lands and build- land acquisition notices and preparing a quick analysis of the Report. ings) for construction and also procure ap- resettlement and rehabilitation package, 10 Material Papers of the Counter Affidavit to the WP No 18483 of 2008. proval of railway authorities for construc- the GoAP, as a strategy, is trying to create 11 “Hyderabad to get 71-km metro ‘free of cost’”, tion of bridges, etc, at railway lines within a fear psychosis among the people along www.business-standard.com New Delhi, 8 Au- gust 2008. 30-60 days of deposit of the Performance the metro routes regarding the inevitabili- 12 In popular parlance, a “settlement” connotes a Security (PS) of Rs 240 crore by MML, ty of giving up their properties on the deal reached in advance by the concerned parties before making it an official formality. which should be done within 180 days of ground that since the government has al- 13 After March 2008, the Line-3 was extended by 4.5 signing the CA. For delay, the GoAP shall ready signed the contract, it will not go km from Habsiguda/Tarnaka to Nagole where 96 acres of land is earmarked for BOT development. pay 0.1% of the PS (i e, Rs 24 lakh) per day back. To add to such feelings, occasional A huge real estate venture of people close to the subject to a maximum of 20% (i e, Rs 48 pronouncements are made to the effect powers that be is known to be going on here. The E&SIA Report of 2003 mentions Line-1 from Ku- crore). The GoAP is bound to pay this pen- that the metro work will start “next katpally to Dilsukhnagar for a length of 18.03 km. alty given the difficulties of getting per- month”, that each day’s delay will cause When the present government took a policy deci- sion to develop mass rail transit system (GO No missions from railways, and land acquisi- an additional expenditure of Rs 3.20 crore 574 dated 4 June 2005), Line-1 was extended at both ends to Miyapur and Dilsukhnagar. From tion problems. The metro corridors will to the BOT developer and hence the project Dilsukhnagar, it got later extended up to have to cross railway lines at several will be completed on schedule, etc. With L B Nagar, which is closer to Nagole. It is at Miyapur that Maytas has been taking up real es- p­laces. Line-2 will cross the entire Secun- full backing of the political leadership, the tate ventures in a big way. It is not clear whether derabad station across all ten platforms top level bureaucracy is riding roughshod Sreedharan had objected to all these or only some extensions. along with a station in the front. The over other government departments for 14 Letter by Montek Singh Ahluwalia to Prime South C­entral Railway (SCR) has plans to acquiring lands/buildings and flouting M­inister, dated 25 July 2008 (Source: Material Papers to the Counter Affidavit in the WP u­pgrade this station to international rules. Taking over of such properties No 18483 of 2008). standards. This is going to cause inordi- is passed off as “transfer from one 15 A team of civil society activists visited the HMR 17 office on 25 October 2008 to peruse the docu- nate delays in getting permissions. In d­epartment to another within the govern- ments under Section 4 of the RTI Act. The web site f­uture, if the concessionaire wants to get ment” by concealing the fact that they are of HMR Limited, www.hyderabadmetrorail.in does not provide the concession agreement (as on out of this project and, therefore, defaults, ultimately handed over to Maytas. For 11 November 2008). and if the CA has to be terminated because Sreedharan, as more cities are gearing 16 It may be noted that the well-functioning Begum- pet airport was closed in Hyderabad due to a of this, the MML will not lose anything. The up to swallow the metro rail projects clause in the agreement with the GMR group that government has agreed to pay a lot to the u­nder his consultancy, things seem to be there should not be another airport within 150 km radius of Shamshabad. After giving over 5,000 private company! getting out of control with the local real acres of land, and Rs 500 crore as interest-free estate bigwigs entering the scene and loan (whose repayment starts after 10 years) to the GMR group, the passengers are levied user 5 Conclusions i­nfluencing decision-making as Charles d­evelopment fees. Inequitable real estate development in Correa argued. 17 Reliable sources in the SCR indicated that the railways would like the metro go underground at c­ities (of the kind Maytas and several other The promotional hoardings of Maytas Secunderabad station. Already, construction of corporate real estate companies are en- on Hyderabad’s streets for its real estate bridges/flyovers has been delayed by several months at three places in the city due to queries gaged in) is “the knife-edge of neoliberal venture, Maytas Hill County, proclaim: raised by railway authorities. urbanism” for which PPPs represent one of “Soon, there will be nothing left”. One the foundations of governance at local hopes this does not become true for References level (Hackworth 2007). The inevitability d­emocracy, its institutions and the politics. Hackworth, Jason (2007): The Neoliberal City: of metro rail and providing “world class” Governance, Ideology and Development in American Urbanism (Ithaca: Cornell University transport to public in Hyderabad, while Notes Press). simultaneously weakening the existing Mohan, Dinesh (2008): “Mythologies, Metro Rail Sys- 1 Letter dated 8 February 2008 from HMR Limited tems and Future Urban Transport”, Economic & public transport systems, has been care- to an applicant under RTI. Political Weekly, 26 January, pp 41-53. fully orchestrated in the last few years. At 2 As per the Counter Affidavit to the WP No 18483 Ramachandraiah, C (2007): “Public Transport O­ptions of 2008 by HMR authorities. in Hyderabad”, Economic & Political Weekly, stake now is not just the future of mass 3 The well known Hyderabad Area Transportation 9 June, pp 2152-54. public transport but the city itself. The Study (HATS), 1988 was done by C Raghavachari Sreedharan, E (2008): “BOT Seriously”, 31 October, of the then Regional Engineering College (now http://www.indianexpress.com/news/bot-seri- Planning Commission has prepared the National Institute of Technology), Warangal. ously/ 379475/. “Model Concession Agreement” which 4 Delhi High Court judgment dated 30 May 2008 in Srinivas, Vamsi (2008): “Maytas takes Metro Home”, WP(C) 8516/2007. Deccan Chronicle, Hyderabad, 8 August. provided the basis for HMRP. Going 5 http://www.bmrc.co.in/ph.html accessed on The Hindu (2008): “Mystery Shrouds Selection of BOT by what this “model” portends for 14 August 2008. Developer”, Hyderabad, 24 July.

40 january 17, 2009 EPW Economic & Political Weekly