Everyone in Delhi feels good about Delhi Metro. It has given residents of the city a public transport network of which they can really be proud. It manages the network efficiently. It runs the trains on time. It provides a clean and comfortable service for commuters at a tariff that is one of the cheapest among all the metro networks in the world. During the construction of the first phase of the network, it even set new standards of safety that other companies in the civil construction sector found worthy of emulation.
The man who got credit for all these achievements was none other than Delhi Metro’s managing director, E Sreedharan. You can’t have any quarrels with that. Here was a man who worked hard to build a modern metro rail network, ensured the project’s implementation on schedule and then put in place a system to run the service efficiently. In a country, where project delays are endemic and inefficiency in public services rarely creates a storm of protests, Mr Sreedharan set up a metro network that raised people’s expectations from a public transport network and made them hopeful that they too could continue to travel safely and comfortably.
It is this hope that got shaken on Sunday morning when residents of Delhi learnt of the collapse of a section of a Delhi Metro bridge under construction. The tumbling of the cranes that were commissioned for rescue work the following day shattered whatever little hope that was still left. Every time a commuter travels on Delhi Metro now, he will be wondering if the pillars and the bridge under his train will stay intact while he completes his journey.
Just as all credit for the successful execution and operation of Delhi Metro had gone to Mr Sreedharan, a large part of the blame for allowing such a mishap (mind you, this was not the first one during the construction of the second phase!) should also be shared by him. What were Mr Sreedharan’s mistakes? Did the Metro Man go wrong by accepting the challenge of implementing the second phase of Delhi Metro in a relatively short time frame and thereby unwittingly allowing contractors to make compromises on safety norms?
The report of the committee that has been set up to inquire into the reason behind last Sunday’s tragedy will come out with specific information to explain what went wrong. While that exercise is under way, it is equally important for Mr Sreedharan to reflect on what mistakes he might have made while executing this massive project in record time.
The Metro Man made two mistakes. One, he did not build a strong team around him to provide a second rung of leaders who could ensure continuity and stability of management of a public transport network. Fourteen years after its inception, Delhi Metro Rail Corporation can boast of only one public face — that of Mr Sreedharan. This is a long time to build the second rung of leadership in an organisation. By not paying adequate attention to the tasks of building his succession, Mr Sreedharan has made himself virtually indispensable. His fine track record as the Metro Man has certainly been dented by this failure.
His second mistake pertains to his response to the bridge collapse on Sunday. He did not take long to announce his resignation, owning moral responsibility for the mishap. This was not the first time that Mr Sreedharan had contemplated resignation. In the early stages of the Delhi Metro project, Mr Sreedharan had once reportedly expressed his desire to quit over differences with sections within the government. There was no public announcement then and he was persuaded to stay back.
Last Sunday, however, Mr Sreedharan decided to make public his decision to quit Delhi Metro. Having done that, which was the most principled and honourable stand taken by any public servant in recent years, Mr Sreedharan should not have gone back on his decision. Now that he has withdrawn his resignation after requests from the government, his critics are likely to say that his resignation announcement was part of a strategy to deflect the public criticism that he would have incurred in the wake of the tragedy. If only Mr Sreedharan had built a second rung of leaders to take over from him, he could have stuck to his decision to quit and silenced his critics as well.
