Search Forum
Blog Entry# 1172929
Posted: Jul 28 2014 (19:41)
7 Responses
Last Response: Aug 09 2014 (18:10)
7 Responses
Last Response: Aug 09 2014 (18:10)
Registration Number : MORLY/E/2014/06535
Name Of Complainant : Shuhaib
Date of Receipt : 30 Jun 2014
Received by : Ministry of Railways, ( Railway Board)
Forwarded to : Palghat Division ...
more...
Name Of Complainant : Shuhaib
Date of Receipt : 30 Jun 2014
Received by : Ministry of Railways, ( Railway Board)
Forwarded to : Palghat Division ...
more...
2 Posts
Within the last 2 days this is the second grievance which i am seeing posted by a member where reply has been received within one month. This is amazing.
As regards the standard answer by the railways, dont know what will actually convince the railway board. Are there specific parameters that they look to get convinced for introducing new trains etc?
As regards the standard answer by the railways, dont know what will actually convince the railway board. Are there specific parameters that they look to get convinced for introducing new trains etc?
I think you mentioned sajin's post.. Actually my grievance forwarded to ADRM of PGT DIVN on 08/07/14.. After two days ie on 10/07/14 the status shown as UNDER PROCESS.. And got reply on 28/07/14..
That is right. I was actually surprised by the swiftness of response since normally most of the times i have seen the replies never come or it is most of the time under process.
At least in these cases there was some response even though the response may not have been satisfactory
At least in these cases there was some response even though the response may not have been satisfactory
I agree. Introduction of new train is policy matter. But, Railway can introduce new trains or extend the existing trains as per the available resources. Kannur - Yesvantpur express was bifurcated and extended upto Karwar based on this matter, as it was not announced in the Railway budget or in the budget discussion, but due to a mention by High Court.
It seems like that Railway was waiting for such an order from Karnataka High Court. Soon after the verdict on Oct-8-2012, Railway extended the train to Karwar on Nov-1-2012, as the High Court had directed to do the same on or before Nov-15-2012. Moreover, High Court had directed to split the train into half(12 coaches to Kannur and 12 to Karwar) by adding 8 more coaches to 16 coaches running at that time running only to Kannur. But, after bifurcation, Railway put just 5 coaches to Kannur(later increased to 8) and 15 coaches to Karwar and the passengers from Kannur had to wait for 2 hours at Mangalore Central for the Karwar train to arrive and proceed to Yesvantpur after amalgamation. Regarding the number of coaches, Railways didn't follow High Court directives. Railway had provided a completely wrong information that just less than 100 passengers...
more...
more...