Flyovers are often presented as practical answers to traffic congestion, especially in growing cities where road expansion is limited, and vehicle numbers keep rising. In theory, they allow uninterrupted movement by separating traffic flows and removing junction delays. In reality, their effectiveness depends on design, landings, maintenance, and how well they integrate with the surrounding road network.

In many cases, congestion does not disappear but merely shifts to different points along the same corridor. In some instances, construction defects, prolonged closures, or delayed openings have prevented these structures from delivering even basic relief. Vidarbha has seen several such projects where the promised improvement did not materialise in everyday commuting conditions.

1. Sitabuldi Flyover (Shaheed Adivasi Gowari Flyover), Nagpur

The Sitabuldi Flyover, officially named Shaheed Adivasi Gowari Flyover, was built to ease congestion between Zero Mile and Sitabuldi, one of the busiest commercial zones in the city. It connects important arterial roads and carries a high volume of private vehicles, public transport, and commercial traffic every day. Despite its strategic location, the flyover has repeatedly witnessed traffic disruptions rather than smooth movement. One of the most prominent incidents was a seven-vehicle pile-up caused when traffic slowed down sharply near the Zero Mile exit. The accident itself was not due to overspeeding but because vehicles were already moving in stop-start conditions.

Such pile-ups indicate that vehicles on the flyover are frequently forced to halt, contradicting the idea of uninterrupted flow. Reports showed that congestion at the landing point near Zero Mile created long queues that extended onto the flyover deck itself. This effectively turned the elevated road into an extension of the ground-level jam. The incident also resulted in delays across connecting roads, affecting traffic towards Civil Lines and Maharajbagh.

Commuters reported being stuck for extended periods, even during non-peak hours.

Another issue with this flyover is its proximity to dense commercial activity, which generates frequent pedestrian movement and informal parking near entry and exit points. These factors reduce the usable road space and create conflicts between slow-moving and fast-moving vehicles. As a result, the flyover often fails to serve its primary purpose during busy periods. Instead of acting as a bypass, it becomes another congested stretch layered above an already crowded junction.

2. Sadar Flyover, Nagpur

The Sadar Flyover was constructed to decongest the Sadar area, a zone that experiences daily traffic pressure due to educational institutions, shopping areas, defence establishments, and now the metro infrastructure. Soon after it became operational, concerns emerged regarding the design of its landing points. Traffic descending from the flyover merges with vehicles approaching from Kasturchand Park and adjacent roads, creating a conflict zone.

This has led to regular slowdowns rather than any noticeable reduction in congestion.

Reports highlighted that the landing area lacked sufficient space to absorb the volume of vehicles coming down during peak hours. Instead of dispersing smoothly, vehicles are forced to slow down sharply or wait for gaps in cross traffic. This has resulted in bottlenecks that frequently stretch back onto the flyover itself. Metro construction and station access further complicate the situation, as road space is shared between multiple modes of transport.

Traffic police have acknowledged recurring problems at this location, particularly during evening hours when office commuters and students return home.

Despite being built as a grade separator, the flyover effectively shifts the congestion point from the main junction to a few metres ahead. Commuters reported that travel time through the Sadar stretch remained largely unchanged even after the flyover opened. In some cases, delays increased due to confusion over merging lanes and lack of clear demarcation.

3. Pardi Flyover, Nagpur

The Pardi Flyover was one of the major infrastructure projects aimed at easing congestion on the eastern entry to Nagpur. It was expected to reduce delays on the highway stretch connecting industrial and residential zones. However, within just four months of opening, one arm of the flyover had to be dug up for additional strengthening work. This immediately caused traffic chaos in an area already prone to long queues.

The repair work meant partial closures and diversions, forcing vehicles back onto surface roads. These roads were not designed to handle such volumes, resulting in severe congestion during morning and evening hours. Truck movement in the area further worsened the situation, as heavy vehicles struggled to navigate narrow alternative routes. Commuters reported that what was supposed to be a faster route became slower than before.

Safety concerns also emerged, as uneven road surfaces and temporary barricades created risks for two-wheelers and pedestrians. Traffic police had to deploy additional personnel to manage the chaos, indicating that the flyover was not functioning as intended. The fact that structural modifications were required so soon after inauguration raised questions about planning and execution. Instead of solving the congestion problem, the flyover became another point of disruption in the transport network.

4. Mankapur Flyover, Nagpur

The Mankapur Flyover was built to ease traffic flow near a busy railway zone and industrial areas. Over time, however, it became associated more with closures and repairs than smooth movement. The flyover experienced long periods of restricted access due to maintenance works and safety concerns following fatal accidents. These closures forced traffic back onto congested surface roads.

During these periods, commuters faced months of delays, with vehicles piling up on adjacent routes. Even after reopening for two-way traffic, reports indicated that congestion remained a daily issue. The alternating closures and partial operations prevented the flyover from delivering consistent benefits. For many users, travel times remained unpredictable.

The recurring nature of these disruptions meant that drivers lost confidence in using the flyover as a reliable route. Instead, many reverted to older surface roads, which further increased congestion in surrounding areas. The original aim of providing a stable and faster corridor was undermined by prolonged operational issues. In effect, the flyover functioned intermittently rather than as a permanent solution.

5. Wadi Flyover, Nagpur

The Wadi Flyover was completed and even subjected to load testing, indicating that it was structurally ready for public use. Despite this, the flyover remained closed for an extended period due to administrative delays. During this time, traffic conditions on the Wadi stretch remained unchanged, with commuters continuing to face daily jams.

The closure meant that vehicles were still forced to pass through busy intersections and narrow stretches that the flyover was meant to bypass. For residents and industrial workers in the area, this translated into lost time and increased fuel consumption. The situation also led to frustration, as a completed structure stood unused while congestion persisted below.

Even after technical readiness, bureaucratic procedures delayed the operational phase, showing how infrastructure benefits can be postponed despite physical completion. The prolonged closure effectively nullified the intended impact of the project for a significant period. In practical terms, the flyover existed only as a visual presence without any functional advantage for traffic management.

6. RTO Flyover (Gyanyogi Dr Shrikant Jichkar Flyover), Amravati Road, Nagpur

The RTO Flyover on Amravati Road was inaugurated as part of a larger plan to decongest one of the busiest corridors in the city. However, immediately after its opening, the flyover was closed again the very next day, leading to confusion and anger among commuters. Traffic conditions on Amravati Road remained unchanged, with long queues continuing during peak hours.

Reports also highlighted that certain sections of the corridor experienced reduced road width due to existing structures and trees. This meant that even with a flyover in place, the ground-level bottlenecks persisted. Vehicles exiting the flyover were forced into narrow stretches, causing slowdowns and frequent jams.

The repeated closures and incomplete integration with surrounding roads prevented the flyover from delivering immediate relief. Instead of acting as a seamless elevated corridor, it became another uncertain route in daily commuting. For many users, the flyover added complexity rather than reducing travel time, especially during office hours.

These six flyovers demonstrate that infrastructure alone does not guarantee decongestion. In several cases, traffic continued to build up due to faulty landings, repair works, closures, or delayed openings. The issues observed were not limited to one part of the region but appeared repeatedly across major corridors in Vidarbha.

Each structure was built with the promise of smoother movement, yet on-ground conditions told a different story. Congestion shifted from junctions to landings, from surface roads to elevated decks, or simply returned due to operational disruptions.

What stands out is that most of these problems were documented soon after inauguration or during routine use. This suggests that the gap between design expectations and everyday reality remains significant. The experiences also show how commuters often bear the cost of incomplete planning and execution. Even large-scale projects can fail to deliver their intended benefits if supporting road networks and operational systems are not aligned.