Accidents happen in large construction projects, and too much should not be read into isolated episodes. Also, the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) has been one of the more successful infrastructure projects in not just the capital but the whole country—work of a high quality done on schedule, within cost, and until recently with a good safety record. All the more reason, then, to wonder why the second phase of the Delhi Metro (taking it from about Phase I’s 65 km of track to nearly 200 km) has been dogged by accidents of the sort the first phase never saw. This has included cranes crashing into cars and a part of a flyover crashing down in East Delhi, in much the same manner of the collapse on Sunday in South Delhi. To add farce to tragedy, the crane pressed into action at the accident site also overturned, yesterday.
What makes Sunday’s incident (it may be wrong to call it an ‘accident’) worrying is that a crack in one of the pillars at the site had been noticed in March. Work was stopped, and resumed a few days ago after some reinforcement, only for the top of the pillar to come down on Sunday and kill five. If indeed it was the crack in the pillar that led to the crash, there are reasons to wonder about other possible safety hazards that have not surfaced. Did the DMRC err in judging the pillar safe? And, if so, are there other errors waiting to be unearthed? An independent audit of the safety of what is being built is a good idea, if only to remove the doubts that will be there in people’s minds.
The episode raises other questions. Though Delhi Metro’s chief, E Sreedharan, announced his resignation on Sunday after taking responsibility for what had happened, this was withdrawn after Delhi Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit refused to let him go. Mr Sreedharan has a hard-earned reputation as an outstanding project manager, and has to his credit landmark projects like the Konkan Railway. But the general sense that the Metro project would suffer in his absence (which is what would have prompted Ms Dikshit’s rejection of his resignation) suggests that he has not built a strong organisation under him. Also worrying is the admission that, while the first phase of the Metro was built at a measured pace, the deadlines being set now (because of next year’s Commonwealth Games) are a lot tighter. Is working to tight deadlines leading to less stringent safety norms being adopted? It is certainly odd that even contractors blacklisted for their safety record continue to be engaged, since the over-riding philosophy is that work must not stop. Some reports suggest that the DMRC has been losing key staffers who have made their reputations by working on the project, and moved on to other jobs, so that supervision of the work done by contractors engaged by DMRC is not what it used to be. Perhaps some of this is nothing more than the imaginings of reporters hungry for instant explanations. Still, there is a case now for looking at DMRC without being blinded by Mr Sreedharan’s larger-than-life presence, and understanding what correctives need to be applied, so that Sunday’s tragedy is not repeated.
