“Deregulation has become more important than quality regulation.” Former Urban Development Secretary Dr Sudhir Krishna’s blunt assessment captures one of the key concerns surrounding India’s infrastructure expansion, where the rush to complete and publicise projects is increasingly being seen as coming at the expense of quality and safety.
“Without independent post-construction audits, shortcomings are buried instead of being addressed systematically,” he said, stressing the need for stronger institutional oversight after projects are completed.
Also read | Cracking under pressure: Flagship highways suffer damage in monsoon showers
Krishna’s comments came during a discussion in The Federal on the systemic flaws behind premature infrastructure failures and the lack of ground-level accountability. Nikhil Jain, political analyst and advocate, also participated in the discussion. He said, “Managing by WhatsApp is not working out,” while Jain pointed to contractor collusion and the absence of personal liability among inspecting officials as key concerns.
Road design standards and expected longevity
Highways constructed with an asphalt surface are engineered to last at least two decades under standard Indian Road Congress norms, while concrete structures are expected to endure for 30 years.
When a newly opened, Rs 4,200-crore Lucknow-Kanpur Expressway develops major slippages within just 13 days of inauguration, it raises serious questions about engineering standards and quality assurance.
Reflecting on the stark mismatch between design protocols and real-world durability, Jain noted, “When a multi-thousand crore project fails within days, it demonstrates that compliance exists only on paper, not on the ground.” Such structural collapses are not isolated incidents but reflect a growing frequency of road and bridge failures across the country. As construction technology advances, the durability of public infrastructure should theoretically improve, yet the gap between financial investment and real-world execution quality continues to widen.
Lack of post-construction oversight
A major contributor to declining quality is the absence of rigorous, independent program evaluations by central bodies. Historically, institutional mechanisms regularly audited government schemes and placed performance shortcomings in the public domain for parliamentary and civic scrutiny.
Without systematic post-construction audits, administrative bodies struggle to identify systemic vulnerabilities in major projects. Highlighting this institutional gap, Dr Krishna stressed that independent post-construction audits are essential to identify and address shortcomings systematically. When public agencies fail to publicly disclose operational defects or evaluate completed works, corrective policy measures are delayed, allowing sub-standard execution methods to persist unchecked.
Speed prioritised over regulatory compliance
The rush to complete and publicise infrastructure projects has led to the dilution of vital regulatory standards. National building and construction codes, revised after extensive expert consultation, are frequently bypassed or relaxed in the name of deregulation and faster execution.
Dr Krishna highlighted this policy shift, warning that the emphasis on deregulation was coming at the expense of quality regulation. Echoing concerns over rushed timelines at the expense of safety, Jain emphasised, “Prioritising inauguration headlines over mandatory safety protocols compromises public trust and endangers lives.” When procedural checks are treated as administrative hurdles rather than mandatory safety guarantees, structural integrity is compromised, exposing public assets to early degradation.
Feasibility and economic alignment
Beyond construction defects, the broader planning framework surrounding high-cost expressways requires re-evaluation. Rapid expressway expansion often proceeds without adequate integration into regional economic planning, urban development needs, or surrounding transit networks.
When high-speed corridors function purely as isolated transit lines without supporting local feeder roads or planned industrial hubs, their economic return remains limited. Building capital-intensive corridors without comprehensive feasibility studies risks creating underutilised assets that strain public resources.
Staffing shortages and monitoring gaps
A critical vulnerability in infrastructure management is the severe shortage of field-level monitoring staff. While overall development budgets for agency execution have scaled up significantly over the past decade, ground-level engineering and inspection personnel numbers have remained virtually static.
Also read | SC orders sweeping road safety reforms nationwide, bans highway parking
Dr Krishna criticised the growing reliance on remote supervision, saying it cannot replace effective ground-level monitoring. Without adequate junior engineers and site inspectors to physically verify compaction layers and material standards, monitoring is increasingly outsourced or conducted remotely. Digital updates and photographs cannot replace physical site inspections, leaving contractors with greater responsibility for execution in the absence of adequate ground-level oversight.
Compaction failures and corruption risks
Road construction relies heavily on systematic sub-grade soil compaction to prevent ground movement and surface slippage. Skipping or rushing multi-layered compaction protocols to save costs or meet aggressive deadlines can contribute to premature road failure.
Pointing out the root cause of execution failures, Jain remarked, “Unchecked contractor collusion and a complete lack of personal liability for inspecting officials create a culture of impunity.” When multi-layered engineering processes are bypassed on paper but billed in full, it points directly to procedural corruption. Ensuring long-term safety on high-speed expressways requires strict criminal accountability, independent technical audits, and administrative penalties for contractors and inspecting authorities alike.