Date:08/12/2004 URL: http://www.thehindu.com/2004/12/08/stories/2004120804481200.htm

National

Go-slow on Garg panel report?

By Vinay Kumar

NEW DELHI, DEC. 7. The Railway Ministry is reportedly "going slow" on finalising the action taken report (ATR) on the Justice Garg Commission report that looked into the accident in November 1998 near Khanna, Punjab, in which 210 passengers lost their lives.

The accident occurred when the Sealdah Express collided with derailed bogies of the Golden Temple Mail. A judicial commission, headed by Justice G.C. Garg, probed the disaster and submitted its report in Julythis year.

As per the Commission of Inquiry Act, 1952, it is incumbent upon the Ministry to table the report in Parliament, along with the ATR, on the cause and responsibility fixed and remedial measures suggested within six months — by January 15, 2005. Since mid-July, the report has been scrutinised by the Ministry but there appears to be a "go- slow" on finalising the ATR. And thereby hangs a tale.

The Commission had indicted the Railway Board's Track Directorate, which allegedly procured substandard rails and relaxed the norms for hydrogen content that became the cause of "rail fracture" ultimately leading to the accident.

Crucial question

The Commission, in chapter 8 of its report, concluded that the accident could have been avoided if the dispensations relating to rails had not been relaxed. Hydrogen flaking and excessive residual stress in rails result in fractures and the Steel Authority of India Ltd. (SAIL) was repeatedly impressed upon by the Ministry to go in for a vacuum degassing plant, on-line ultrasonic testing of rails at the manufacturing stage and to commission new bi-planer machines to roll out new rails with tighter specifications.

On page 262 of the report, accessed by The Hindu , Justice Garg said: "I would hold the Railways in the Directrorate of Track Procurement to be primarily responsible for not ensuring the production of quality rails, for granting relaxations in the production of rail steel and the rails and for not making available USFD machines for a long time to the field staff." Secondary responsibility, he said, lay at the door of the Director-General of Supply and Disposal, the then inspecting agency which had adopted a "casual approach" in not ensuring quality control.