BMLTA Amendment notified: Tunnel Roads, Elevated Corridors to evade institutional scrutiny

The latest amendment to the BMLTA Act pertains to Section 19(5).

Amid public criticism, the Karnataka government has notified the Bengaluru Metropolitan Land Transport Authority (Amendment) Act, 2026 (BMLTA) recently, which will shield several controversial infrastructure projects planned between 2022 and mid-2026 from institutional scrutiny.

After the Act was passed in 2022, the BMLTA was finally operationalised in mid-2026 with the notification of its rules. The latest amendment to the BMLTA Act pertains to Section 19(5).

The provision of the Section retrospectively validates decisions and actions relating to projects initiated between the adoption of the BMLTA Act in 2022 and the notification of the 2026 Rules, deeming them to have been undertaken under the Act.

These decisions and actions include “decisions taken, plans prepared, operations undertaken and proceedings pending”, thereby providing retrospective statutory protection to Bengaluru’s urban transport projects.

The Congress government introduced the controversial BMLTA (Amendment) Bill, 2026, during the Monsoon Session held in August. The bill was passed in both houses without any meaningful debate amid high drama, as leaders of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) protested and demanded the resignation of former Minister B. Nagendra, who is accused in a scam.

The official document reviewed by The Hindu stated that the Bill received the assent of then Karnataka Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot on October 9. The amendment was subsequently notified through the State Gazette.

With the amendment, projects championed by Chief Minister D.K. Shivakumar, including tunnel roads, Sancharayukta, 11 elevated corridors and the Hebbal short tunnel, will fall outside the purview of the BMLTA, the city’s transport planning authority.

Civic activists had condemned the amendment when it was passed during the Session. They had emphasised that it was intended to safeguard controversial projects by allowing them to escape scrutiny under the BMLTA Rules, against which multiple Public Interest Litigations (PILs) had been filed.

The latest amendment essentially incorporates the substance of Rule 24, the savings clause of the BMLTA Rules. According to an RTI reply from the Urban Development Department (UDD), reviewed by The Hindu, the Rules received over 200 objections, predominantly Rule 24, after the draft Rules were published in July this year.

In their objection, several citizen groups had termed the provision “unconstitutional” and “unscientific”. The objections stressed that this single savings clause would take “problematic projects worth over ₹1 lakh crore” out of the BMLTA’s ambit.

One of the objections pointed out that the savings clause would defeat the very purpose of establishing the authority. Meanwhile, suggestions submitted by citizens urged the UDD to repeal Rule 24 to ensure accountability and transparency.

However, the UDD went ahead and notified the rules without deleting the savings clause. Consequently, multiple PILs were filed challenging the Rule, and hearings are under way.

Pointing to the large number of objections and the alleged absence of any changes to the Rule, environmental activist Dattatraya Devare said that the exercise of inviting public objections was merely a formality.

“The authorities barely care about public opinion, which raises questions about the importance of public participation,” he told The Hindu.

Now, while the PILs are still pending before the court, the government has incorporated the earlier provision, which existed merely as a “rule”, into the Act itself through an amendment, despite objections from citizens. It remains unclear what will happen to the savings clause and the pending legal challenges now that the provision has been incorporated into a section of the Act.