Should lucknow be given the status of a metro?

what for !!!
just mere area of a town can not be sufficient to call it a metro !

Hyderabad, Ahmedabad, Varoda, Trivandrum, Chandigarh are nowhere less than Lucknow.

Never, We have more good cities to be given metro position.

The following cities should get or continue the status of Metro:
1. Delhi
2. Mumbai
3.Kolkata
4. Chennai
5.Bangalore

I guess there is no special devlopement in the city to give it as status of a metro. the citys which are metros in india are only 4 Delhi, Mumbai,Kolkata and Chennai. Apart from that there are few mini metros like Ahmedabad, Hyderabad, Pune and some other places. They each have defined their roles in indian Economy and world status and that is the reason they are mini metros.

why not. after all it is the capital of the largest state of India

Lucknow doesn't qualify to be a Metro. It doesn't have the basic infrastructure to be given that status. There are other cities far more developed than Lucknow, which would win hands down.
Bangalore and Pune for instance.
There is a lot happening in these cities both Nationally and Internationally.In fact they have made a name for themselves in the Global Market. Nations know of Bangalore and Pune's existence.
Lucknow needs to have more Economic and Civic growth to be seen as a ' Happening City '

yes but after others be patient

Yuvika,
The Metro City status is decide by Indian Census Commision. According to them, the qualifying number is the population. More than 4 million are considered as Metro.

With this definition, Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata and Chennai were the 4 Metros, now Bangalore and Hyderabad has been qualified. So now we have 6 Metro Cities.

For your info, Lucknow's population in 2006 is 2.5 million.To get the Metro Status to Lucknow, now you know where to work upon.

yes it should be given