Friday 05 Jun 2026
A car in the Male' Taxi Line fleet: MTCC has rolled out the taxi application for android. (Photo/MTCC)
Maldives Transport and Contracting Company (MTCC) has officially launched the Android application for its Male’ Taxi Line (MTL) service on the Google Play Store.
The release of the application comes amid heightened public scrutiny following serious allegations of corruption related to the design and development of the application.
In a statement on Thursday, MTCC confirmed that the application is now available for download on Google Play and is intended to provide residents of the Greater Male’ Area with a convenient platform to book safe, reliable and environmentally friendly electric taxi services.
The Malé Taxi Line App is now available on Google Play! ????????
— MTCC Plc (@MTCCPlc) June 4, 2026
Book safe, reliable and environmentally friendly electric taxis across the Greater Malé Region with just a few taps.
???? Download the app today:https://t.co/fk9I4scrF1
The app is now available on both Google Play and… pic.twitter.com/tjLyXBHumY
The company further said the MTL web application, which has been used until now, will be discontinued in the near future. As such, it urged customers currently using the web platform to transition to the mobile application at the earliest.
According to MTCC, the move is aimed at enhancing the user experience through features such as real-time taxi tracking and integrated payment solutions.
While the Android version was launched on Thursday, the iOS version was released on the Apple App Store last Tuesday, making the service accessible to users across both major smartphone platforms.
MTCC has introduced the service under the hashtag #RayyithungeTaxi, translating to the People's Taxi. The initiative is regarded as a significant step toward modernizing the transport network in the Greater Male’ region and addressing the longstanding challenges faced by the public in securing taxi services.
Despite the rollout and expansion of the service, allegations of corruption surrounding the awarding of the application’s development contract continue to persist. Critics and industry experts have alleged that the contract was not awarded through an open and competitive procurement process. Additional claims have suggested that the project was awarded to a specific party at a cost substantially higher than prevailing market rates, potentially providing an undue advantage. Industry observers have further questioned whether the reported development costs are commensurate with the application's overall quality and functionality.
