Puttur Flag Post Project Faces Questions Over Cost Escalation

Bengaluru: The recent erection of a 75-metre-high flagpole in Puttur, claimed to be the third tallest in the Dakshina Kannada district, has triggered questions over a sharp escalation in project cost and the procedure followed in approving the revised estimate.

According to official records, the Puttur City Municipal Council had, in March 2025, approved a proposal to erect the flagpole at Birumalai Hills within Puttur town limits at an estimated cost of ₹25.93 lakh. The project was intended to be taken up as a civic initiative by the municipal body.

However, on January 13, 2026, the project estimate was revised to ₹84.71 lakh—more than three times the original amount—and was cleared through an order signed by the deputy commissioner of the Dakshina Kannada district. Currently, the Puttur City Municipal Council is not in session, and the deputy commissioner is also serving as the administrator of the civic body.

The approval of the revised estimate and the circumstances surrounding the escalation have drawn attention from former office-bearers and local stakeholders. Former Puttur Urban Development Authority chairperson Bhamy Ashok Shenoy has raised objections to the development, questioning the basis for the substantial increase in the estimated cost and the manner in which the approval was granted.

Town elders and rights activists have sought clarity on the technical and administrative grounds under which the estimate was revised, stating that such a steep escalation warrants detailed justification. He has also pointed to the absence of an elected municipal council at the time the revised estimate was approved. They are now planning to complain to the civic administration heads in Bengaluru and also to the Lokayukta of Karnataka

Senior citizens and residents have also expressed concerns over the project. While acknowledging that the national flag holds symbolic and emotional significance, they have pointed out that projects involving flag posts of this scale are governed by specific technical and administrative protocols.

According to them, these include site selection, structural design, safety clearances and financial scrutiny. They have alleged that these procedures may not have been followed in full while taking up the project.

They have further stated that the decision-making process appeared to have been influenced by political considerations, particularly in the absence of an elected civic body to deliberate on the revised proposal.

Officials have not yet issued a detailed response addressing the concerns raised regarding the cost escalation and the approvals granted for the project.