State stays NMMC house order, wants it to bear ₹1400 cr Rly project cost

NAVI MUMBAI: The state government has stayed a general body resolution by the Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation (NMMC) that rejected a government order (GR) asking the civic body to bear a cost of ₹1,400 crore for a Communication-Based Train Control (CBTC) project at the Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Terminus (CSTM)-Panvel harbor railway line

NAVI MUMBAI: The state government has stayed a general body resolution by the Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation (NMMC) that rejected a government order (GR) asking the civic body to bear a cost of ₹1,400 crore for a Communication-Based Train Control (CBTC) project at the Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Terminus (CSTM)-Panvel harbor railway line.

HT Image

The NMMC general body had stated that it will burden them with a cost that does not concern them, but the government says it is in the public interest.

The railways have planned the CBTC project to help increase the frequency of local trains and to minimise the gaps between the trains. It is expected to allow 24 trains an hour to ply, which is at present 16, reducing the headway between the trains from 4 minutes to 2 minutes.

The cost of the project was estimated at ₹15,909 crore of which the state had to bear 50% share i.e. ₹7,954.40 crore. The state reportedly decided to shift the cost burden to MMRDA, CIDCO, BMC (15% each) and to NMMC (5%). It directed NMMC to the cost to the tune of ₹795.45 crore via an order on March 9, 2018. The nodal agencies were asked to make budgetary provisions for the same and transfer the amounts to Mumbai Railway Vikas Corporation.

Thereafter the former municipal commissioner Ramaswamy N-led NMMC administration presented a proposal in the general body of elected corporators to approve transfer of ₹1,393.55 crore as NMMC’s share to the state for the project.

The house, however, rejected the proposal with a majority on February 20, 2019, stating that the civic body did not benefit from the project and hence the huge cost burden on it is not justified.

NMMC was at the time ruled by the former minister and current BJP MLA Ganesh Naik led NCP while the BJP-Shiv Sena government was in power with present chief minister Eknath Shinde as the Urban Development minister, a department he continues to hold.

At that time, Ramaswamy had been at loggerheads with the ruling, which had rejected several of his proposals in the house and he had sent them to the state for approval.

Four years after the rejection of the house, on July 27 this year, Rajesh Narvekar, municipal commissioner says he “reported the rejection of the government proposal by NMMC general body to the state.”

Following the communication by the commissioner, the UD has now in its order dated November 29 stayed the resolution rejecting its order under the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act Section 451(1) as it is against people’s interest and government order. It has given 30 days period for the ‘concerned’ to submit their say, if any. The order states that if there is no submission, further requisite action will be taken as per section 451(3) of the Act.

Currently, there is no elected body in NMMC presently, as the tenure of the last body ended in 2020 and no civic elections have been held since, as is the case with several municipal corporations in the state. The possibility of the elected body of corporators that had rejected the proposal now responding, hence does not exist.

When contacted, municipal commissioner Rajesh Narvekar who confirmed the receipt of the order, denied he had asked for the rejection of the GB resolution by the state. “I had only reported the rejection of the proposal which had been presented under the instructions of the government.”

Narvekar further stated that, “I understand the figure was considerably reduced after the proposal had been rejected by the GB. Initially it was for two projects of CSTM-Panvel and another line. Now only the CSTM-Panvel route is being considered.”

Stated Narvekar, “We shall study the order in detail and respond to the government accordingly.”