On June 15, 2026, Kerala Chief Minister V.D. Satheesan and Transport Minister C.P. John launched the 'Priyadarshini' scheme in Thiruvananthapuram, pledging free rides for women on state‑run buses. The promise was a flagship poll pledge of the Congress‑led government, yet within a month it has attracted fierce criticism for its fiscal and social repercussions.

Root of Financial Instability

The Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) was already grappling with massive deficits, delayed salaries, and mounting pension liabilities. Employees have taken the corporation to court, and some even resorted to suicide after months of unpaid pensions. The free‑ride scheme added a new layer of strain. Initial estimates pegged the cost at ₹2 crore per day, but actual expenditures are climbing, pushing KSRTC deeper into a debt trap.

Impact on Private Bus Operators

Women, who comprise a large share of Kerala’s passenger base, have shifted en masse to KSRTC buses, leaving private operators with dwindling patronage. Many private buses have either ceased operations or reduced routes, citing unsustainable passenger numbers. The sector has called for an indefinite strike, but the state has yet to offer any compensation or relief package. Transport Minister C.P. John’s only suggestion—exploring alternative business models—was met with scepticism.

Auto‑Rickshaw Drivers Feel the Ripple

Auto‑rickshaw drivers, another vital link in urban mobility, are also reporting losses as women increasingly prefer free KSRTC services over short‑haul auto rides. The loss of this informal employment avenue adds another socio‑economic dimension to the crisis.

Need for Policy Re‑evaluation

Experts argue that a blanket free‑travel policy is unsustainable. Instead, the scheme should target economically vulnerable groups—students, unemployed youth, and women in the unorganised sector—while charging those who can afford it. The government announced a 100‑day review, but such an assessment should have preceded the manifesto commitment.

Lessons from History

Comparisons are being drawn with the 1996 arrack ban imposed by then‑Chief Minister A.K. Antony, a move aimed at wooing women voters that failed to curb alcohol consumption or secure electoral gains. Similarly, 'Priyadarshini' risks becoming a well‑intentioned but financially hollow initiative, highlighting the perils of populist promises without rigorous feasibility studies.