“Despite recurring public expenditure on road macadamisation in Srinagar, newly repaired roads quickly deteriorate into potholes and cracks, raising serious concerns about accountability, work quality, and the misuse of public funds.”
Every year, Srinagar waits for the road repair season with the hope that broken stretches, potholes and damaged surfaces will finally disappear. Every year, large sums of public money are spent on macadamisation. And every year, the same question returns: why do newly macadamised roads begin developing cracks, potholes and uneven surfaces within months? This is no longer simply a question of inconvenience. It is a question of accountability, quality and public money. Srinagar has witnessed repeated road improvement drives, with different agencies undertaking macadamisation and restoration works. In 2024, the district administration had announced a plan to macadamise around 350 kilometres of roads and specifically stressed the use of quality material, proper gradients and durable blacktopping. In 2025, the Roads and Buildings Department said more than 141 kilometres had been macadamised in Srinagar as part of its road improvement campaign. Yet the experience of residents tells a different story. Several roads that were repaired or macadamised recently have again started showing cracks and deterioration. This is particularly frustrating because similar complaints were raised in previous years. There have been instances where even important roads and stretches in prominent or VIP areas developed potholes and cracks after repair, prompting public criticism and demands for action. Past reporting has documented roads that failed to withstand even one season after being macadamised. The problem, therefore, cannot simply be blamed on rain, snow or heavy traffic. Weather certainly affects Srinagar’s roads. The city experiences freezing temperatures, waterlogging, snow and repeated freeze-thaw cycles. Heavy traffic also places considerable pressure on road surfaces. But these are not unexpected conditions. They are part of Srinagar’s climate and urban reality. A road designed and constructed for the city must account for them. The bigger question is whether roads are being constructed according to the required specifications and whether those specifications are being properly monitored. If a road develops serious cracks soon after macadamisation, responsibility cannot end with a patchwork repair. Authorities must determine why the road failed in the first place. Was the base properly prepared? Was the surface adequately compacted? Was the material of the required quality? Was the thickness of the blacktopping according to the tender specifications? Was drainage properly addressed before the macadam was laid? Were quality-control tests conducted at different stages of construction? These are technical questions, but they are also questions of public accountability. There is another recurring problem: road construction and utility works often appear to operate without sufficient coordination. A road may be freshly macadamised, only to be dug up later for water supply, drainage, electricity, telecommunications or other works. Such practices not only waste public money but also weaken the road surface and inconvenience residents. Srinagar’s road problem is therefore not merely about putting a fresh layer of asphalt on an old surface. It is about managing the entire road lifecycle—from planning and drainage to construction, inspection, maintenance and accountability. Interestingly, road works are still being tendered in Srinagar this year.
“Citizens in Srinagar aren’t asking for world-class highways—just durable roads built with the funds already spent. Despite official promises, newly paved streets deteriorate after a single season, locking the city into a costly, endless loop of repairs and re-tendering. True progress requires shifting focus from constant repaving to enforcing real accountability for those who build roads that fail.”
Recent government tender records show fresh macadamisation works in different colonies and localities, demonstrating that the cycle of road construction and repair continues. That makes the present moment important. Before another season of macadamisation gathers pace, authorities should review the roads completed during the previous cycle. A road that has already failed should not simply receive another layer without identifying the cause of failure. There should be a public mechanism for monitoring major road projects. Details such as the executing agency, contractor, estimated cost, completion date, maintenance liability and quality-testing results should be accessible to citizens. Independent technical inspections of recently completed roads could also help establish whether premature deterioration is the result of poor workmanship, inadequate materials, drainage failures or other factors. Most importantly, accountability must follow the money. If a contractor fails to meet specifications, there must be consequences under the contract. If an executing agency certifies substandard work, responsibility should also be examined at the supervisory level. If officials have repeatedly issued completion certificates for roads that deteriorate shortly afterwards, that too deserves scrutiny. The objective should not be to punish someone merely because a road develops a crack. Roads can deteriorate for legitimate technical reasons. The objective should be to establish responsibility through evidence rather than allowing every failure to become somebody else’s problem. Srinagar deserves roads that last beyond one season. Citizens are not asking for luxury infrastructure. They are asking for roads constructed with the money already allocated for that purpose—and for those roads to provide reasonable service for the period promised under the contract. The administration has repeatedly emphasised quality and timely completion. Now it must ensure that these instructions are translated into measurable accountability on the ground. The question is no longer whether Srinagar needs better roads. Everyone agrees that it does. The real question is simpler: when a newly macadamised road develops cracks again and again, who is responsible and who is being held accountable? Until that question receives a clear answer, Srinagar will continue to see the same cycle: damaged roads, fresh tenders, new macadamisation, premature cracks and another round of repairs. That is not sustainable road management. It is a costly cycle that the city can no longer afford.
