IMPORTANT EXTRACTS FROM THE SREEDHARAN COMMITTEE REPORT

The Committee have reservations about the survivability of the present alignment

The Committee’s assessment is the new proposed line can be constructed faster and possibly at a lesser cost

1.1 A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed in the High Court of Delhi on 17.4.2013 stating that Railway is following a technically flawed alignment with 1 in 80 grade between Katra and Banihal which is located in geologically adverse rock formations and therefore would have poor survivability and would be difficult to construct and maintain. Instead they pleaded for a much shorter alignment with 1 in 44 grade to be adopted which would address most of the geological adverse situations and would provide a double line connectivity and which would be faster for execution and easier to maintain and on the whole more economical and beneficial to the country.

1.2 The Hon’ble high court ordered on 26.5.2014 that “it would be appropriate if the Railway Board constitutes a Committee of experts to examine the comparative merits of the two systems from a technical stand point. The said Committee would be constituted by the Railway Board but, Dr. E. Sreedharan (former Chairman of Delhi Metro Rail Corporation) be also requested to be part of the Committee. The Committee shall give its report within 8 weeks and the Railway Board shall deliberate upon the same and give its final response within four weeks thereafter. We make it clear that the Railway Board may consider not only the technical aspects which would be part of the Committee’s Report but also the financial and other aspects before it gives its conclusions. A copy of the conclusions arrived at by the Railway Board shall be given to the petitioner. We also make it clear  that while this  consideration by the Expert Committee and then by the  Railway Board takes  place, work under the project may go on as planned as we have not passed any stay order”.

7.6 All members of this Committee have serious reservations on the safety and stability of this bridge. On this score alone we are unable to endorse the present contour alignment with 1 in 80 grade which has necessitated this enormous Arch Bridge albeit this being a signature bridge.

7.10 There was an opportunity with the Railways when Mr. Ravindra committee was appointed in December 2008, when all works were stopped and re-alignment issue was being deliberated to thoroughly investigate the new 1 in 44 grade alignment. But unfortunately this was not done. The effort was only to adjust the alignments locally and not to take a holistic view of the enormous problems which lay ahead in construction and future maintenance. The Railway Board probably did not want to change the location of Chenab Bridge. Half hearted efforts did not yield  the desired results.

8.0 As per the data provided, the new proposed alignment is shorter by 36 km with only 8 tunnels and 7 bridges with near straight alignment all through. It has 7 stations with average inter station distance of 8.70 km. The new line is proposed to be constructed as double line with single track parallel tunnels with cross passages at intervals of 350 metres. The tunnels are located near the base of the mountain range and cross it perpendicular or near to perpendicular.  The bridges are at the floor of the valley and cross the valley at or near right angle. The new alignment crosses the faults at close to 90 degree thus providing better conditions for tunneling, stability of slopes and reduces susceptibility to land slide hazards. In the new alignment,  mega bridges over Chenab and Anji are replaced by smaller bridges.  Rescue and relief operation will be basically rail based. The double line will give enough line capacity for all time to come.

8.5 Train derailments will be very minimal on account of straight alignment. The present alignment, having a number of sharp curves will be more susceptible to train derailments in addition to more wear and tear on curves.

8.8 The country will be required to construct many more such Railway projects in Himalayas. The experience of planning and implementing a short alignment with steep grades on Katra – Banihal section will be a valuable experience for the country.

9.2 It will be obvious that adopting a flatter grade of 1 in 80 in such difficult terrains, beset with a number of known and unknown faults and mountain folds, is not a technically prudent or practical step.  Instead, following the general engineering philosophy adopted in such terrains world over as well as in India, a steeper gradient cutting across mountain ranges and folds at right angles or near right angles and tucked deep into the mountains away from dangerous slopes, which will reduce considerably total length of construction in difficult terrains, is the right solution.

9.4 The Committee have reservations about the survivability of the present alignment, particularly the major Arch bridge across Chenab river and therefore we are unable to technically endorse the present alignment.

9.5 On considerations of constructability, stability, survivability, safety in train operations, quick and easy evacuation of passengers from tunnels, saving in travel time, more capacity, etc, the new alignment with 1 in 44 grade is undoubtedly superior.

9.6 The Committee’s assessment is the new proposed line can be constructed faster and possibly at a lesser cost than what it would take for the balance works on the existing alignment to be completed provided it meets the acceptable technical limits as a result of detailed on site survey – fixing control points, geological, geotechnical investigations.

10.2 We feel the project cannot be completed by any stretch of imagination before December 2022 i.e. in 8 years if the present pattern and style of implementation is followed. The cost of the project will escalate astronomically on account of price escalation, claims of contractors and unforeseen items of major works.

10.3 The Committee would therefore like to caution that if the Government wants to complete the project early, the present system and style of construction management will have to be changed. We would suggest that the whole work is entrusted to a dedicated, fully Government owned Company (SPV) with an empowered Board of Management, who can take all technical, financial and administrative decisions on their own without any reference to Northern Railway or Railway Board.  A similar set up was successfully tried for the completion of the Konkan Railway project.

10.4 This Country can easily find a Railway Engineer who can Head such an organization, BE IN-CHARGE OF THE PROJECT FOR ITS ENTIRE PERIOD and execute the project successfully with dedication and determination within a period of 6 to 7 years.