|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is really ironic that the passengers of`A0the Indian Railways pay a safety surcharge ranging from Re 1 to Rs 100 per ticket to travel by a system that’s anything but safe.`A0I wonder if this happens anywhere else in the world? Till now, one saw railway accidents caused by human error, sabotage, terrorism, lack of repair or poor maintenance of tracks, signals, and rolling stock. There have also been accidents involving old bridges. The year 2001, for example, saw one of the worst accidents when three bogies of Mangalore-Chennai Mail plunged into the Kadalundy river, killing more than 50 passengers and injuring over 200. `A0 The 139-year-old bridge over the river had collapsed under the weight of the train, thereby exposing the Railway’s claims on safety inspections. A year later,`A0Howrah-New Delhi Rajdhani Express had met a similar fate near Gaya, resulting in the loss of 125 lives. Here, too,`A0the 86-year-old bridge over the Dhawa river was the suspect. But what happened at Bhagalpur was unpardonable, even by the Railway’s safety standards. `A0It was not the case of a bridge collapsing under the weight of a running train, but an old, abandoned bridge falling on a coach, causing death and destruction.`A0What was worse was that just two days prior to the accident, part of the overbridge had fallen on the railway track at Bhagalpur station. It was therefore obvious that the rest would fall. Yet, the Railways did not bother to take the steps required from a responsible service provider. In fact, the partial collapse of the bridge was a warning — the Railways, however, failed to heed it.`A0 It was not just negligence, but absolute negligence on the part of the Railways.`A0 Railway Minister Lalu Prasad’s statement in Parliament following the accident was`A0equally disturbing.`A0Admitting to lapses on the part of the Railways, the minister said three railway engineers had been suspended and the contractor entrusted with dismantling the overbridge had been blacklisted. And he also announced ex gratia payments for the kin of the deceased and also to those injured in the accident.`A0 But there was no promise of long-term action to stop such accidents. In fact,`A0mere blacklisting of the contractor will not do. There should be an investigation into who appointed such an irresponsible contractor, what were the terms of the contract, who were to supervise the work, etc. And the compensation money paid to the victims of the accident should be recovered from him and the officials in charge of the work. Why should passengers pay for that too?`A0`A0 But, most important of all, the government should appoint an independent audit committee to inspect each and every railway bridge in the country and submit a report on the structural integrity of each of them. And this report should be made public. The audit committee should also involve the local people so that they keep track of unsafe bridges and ensure that the Railways do not use such bridges till they are rendered safe. The trains pass through an estimated 1,20,000 bridges throughout the country. `A0Out of this, over 50 per cent are said to be around 100 years old.`A0 According to one estimate, nearly 7,500 bridges need rehabilitation. `A0 So beginning`A0with the`A0old ones, the committee should examine each one of them and suggest corrective steps within a specified time frame. The committee should put a notice before every bridge — green boards should signify safe bridges, blue boards for those that require repair and red ones for those that need to be condemned.`A0And the Railways should come up with a time frame within which they would undertake the work of rendering the bridges safe. Till this is done, trains going on these tracks should be diverted or re-routed. The Railways should move
away from a reactive approach towards safety only after an
accident.`A0It should adopt a pro-active approach and`A0make every
effort to prevent accidents and render railway journeys safe.
|
R