Citizens Seek Transparency in Metro Expansion Plan
Say Phase 1 has not met its projected ridership
Hyderabad:Citizen forums on Wednesday raised concerns over the proposed Phase II expansion of the Hyderabad Metro Rail (HMR), alleging that Phase I had failed to meet ridership expectations and public needs.
Representatives of Urban Development Forum, Citizens for Better Public Transport, Hyderabad Citizens Forum and Climate Front Telangana, presenting data at a press conference, said that the first phase was designed to carry 15 lakh passengers daily, but current ridership stood at around 4 to 4.5 lakh.
They also said the system, operated by L&T Metro Rail Hyderabad Ltd (L&TMRHL), was planned with six-coach trains but continued with three coaches.
The groups demanded that the state government, the Union urban affairs ministry, HMR Limited, Indian Railway Finance Corporation and L&TMRHL make public key financial and operational details related to Phase I and the proposed Phase II.
Their demands included publication of a Comptroller and Auditor General-audited financial statement for Phase I, disclosure of terms of the now-cancelled Rs 13,527 crore refinancing agreement with IRFC, and placing demand studies, ridership projections and viability assessments for Phase II in the public domain before approval.
They also called for public consultations along the proposed corridors, introduction of income-linked fare concessions, and disclosure of revenue-sharing arrangements, including income from commercial land development.
Citing an RTI reply from the Union urban affairs ministry, the forums said the state government had proposed seven new corridors covering 122.9 km at an estimated cost of Rs 38,595 crore. As of May 2026, the proposal remained under appraisal and had not been approved or funded.
They alleged that no independent demand study or ridership projection had been made public and that communities along the proposed corridors had not been formally consulted. The forums questioned the basis for the proposed investment, given that Phase I had not achieved even 40 per cent of its projected ridership, and raised concerns over whether the expansion would prioritise public transport needs or serve specific corridors. They also questioned whether the proposed expenditure would be more effective compared to investments in TGSRTC services, suburban rail or last-mile connectivity solutions.
