Odisha train crash: Audit report last year flagged multiple shortcomings. 10 points
In its 2022 report, ‘Derailment in Indian Railways’, the CAG held the engineering department of Indian Railways responsible for the majority of derailments.
While Union railway minister Ashwini Vaishnaw on Sunday said the “root cause” of the deadly triple train accident in Odisha's Balasore district has been identified, Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge pointed out the Parliamentary Standing Committee's 323rd report which criticised the railways for the “disregard” shown by the railway board towards the recommendations of the Commission of Railway Safety (CRS).
It was said that CRS investigates only 8 per cent to 10 per cent of accidents. Then why was CRS not strengthened, he asked. "According to the latest CAG audit report, almost seven out of 10 train accidents between 2017-18 and 2020-21 were due to train derailment. From 2017-21, there was zero testing of Rail and Weld (Track Maintenance) for safety in the East Coast Railway. Why was it ignored?" the Congress president asked.
In its 2022 report, ‘Derailment in Indian Railways’, the Comptroller and Auditor General, held the engineering department of Indian Railways responsible for the majority of derailments. It also suggested the national carrier to develop a robust monitoring mechanism to ensure timely implementation of maintenance activities.
What did the CAG report say?
{{/usCountry}}In its 2022 report, ‘Derailment in Indian Railways’, the Comptroller and Auditor General, held the engineering department of Indian Railways responsible for the majority of derailments. It also suggested the national carrier to develop a robust monitoring mechanism to ensure timely implementation of maintenance activities.
What did the CAG report say?
{{/usCountry}}1. In the audit for 2017-18 to 2020-21, the CAG said poor track maintenance, overspeeding, and mechanical failure were significant reasons for derailments.
{{/usCountry}}1. In the audit for 2017-18 to 2020-21, the CAG said poor track maintenance, overspeeding, and mechanical failure were significant reasons for derailments.
{{/usCountry}}2. There were shortfalls ranging from 30-100 per cent in inspections by Track Recording Cars required to assess geometrical and structural conditions of railway tracks.
{{/usCountry}}2. There were shortfalls ranging from 30-100 per cent in inspections by Track Recording Cars required to assess geometrical and structural conditions of railway tracks.
{{/usCountry}}3. The idling of track machines was noticed on account of blocks not given by the operating department (32 per cent), blocks not planned by divisions (30 per cent), operational problems (19 per cent), non-availability of staff (five per cent) and no scope of work (three per cent).
{{/usCountry}}3. The idling of track machines was noticed on account of blocks not given by the operating department (32 per cent), blocks not planned by divisions (30 per cent), operational problems (19 per cent), non-availability of staff (five per cent) and no scope of work (three per cent).
{{/usCountry}}4. Analysis of 1,129 ‘Inquiry Reports’ of derailment accidents in 16 Zonal Railways revealed 24 factors responsible for derailments in the selected cases/accidents. The total damages/loss of assets in these cases was reported as ₹32.96 crore.
5. A total of 422 derailments were attributable to the ‘engineering department’. The major factor responsible for derailment was related to ‘maintenance of track’ (171 cases), followed by ‘deviation of track parameters beyond permissible limits’ (156 cases).
6. The number of derailments attributable to the ‘mechanical department’ was 182. Defects in ‘wheel diameter variation and defects in coaches/wagons’ were the major contributor (37 per cent) to the factors responsible for derailments.
7. The number of accidents attributable to the ‘loco pilots’ was 154. ‘Bad driving/over speeding’ was the major factor responsible for derailments.
8. The number of accidents attributable to the ‘operating department’ was 275. ‘Incorrect setting of points and other mistakes in shunting operations’ accounted for 84 per cent.
9. In 63 per cent cases, the ‘inquiry reports’ were not submitted to the accepting authority within the prescribed time schedule. In 49 per cent cases, there was a delay in the acceptance of the reports by accepting authorities.
10. Fire extinguishers had not been provided in 27,763 coaches (62 per cent) in violation of extant norms.
