The Jharkhand Bus Owners’ Association, representing private bus operators, announced an 18% increase in fares on Friday. The decision was attributed to the surging cost of fuel, with diesel prices crossing the Rs 100 per litre mark.
Reasons Behind the Fare Hike
Arun Budhia, president of the association, stated, “The last fare revision occurred on July 1, 2021. Over the past 59 months, new toll plazas have emerged across various routes. Furthermore, the crisis in West Asia has driven diesel prices beyond Rs 100 per litre, causing significant losses for operators.” According to the association, the 18% increase is essential for operators to sustain their businesses.
Impact on Specific Routes
The fare revision has led to notable increases on several routes. For instance, the fare from Ranchi to Garhwa rose from Rs 400 to Rs 470. A ticket to Palamu now costs Rs 415, up from Rs 350. Passengers traveling to Gumla will pay Rs 240, compared to the earlier Rs 200. The fare for Simdega increased from Rs 230 to Rs 270. Long-distance interstate routes were also affected, with fares from Ranchi to Patna and Ranchi to Kolkata rising from Rs 500 to Rs 590.
Criticism from Passenger Association
The Jharkhand Yatri Sangh (passengers’ association) strongly opposed the hike. In an emergency meeting chaired by president Prem Mittal on Friday, members unanimously condemned the arbitrary increase. Mittal argued, “Under the Motor Vehicles Act, the authority to determine transport fares rests solely with the transport department. No passenger vehicle operator has the legal right to fix fares at their own discretion.”
Questioning the Math
Mittal questioned the justification for an 18% fare hike when diesel prices had risen only by 5%. He emphasized that bus and tempo fares in Ranchi and across the state are already among the highest in the country. Expressing surprise at reports that the Federation of Jharkhand Chamber of Commerce and Industries (FJCCI) held talks with bus operators to determine rates, Mittal said, “Fixing fares is strictly the government’s duty, and the chamber should restrict itself to offering suggestions. We demand immediate intervention from the transport secretary to prevent the exploitation of the public.”
