Earnings - Comptroller and Auditor General of India

Report No.6 of 2006 (Railways)traders. In September 1982, Railway Board asked Zonal Railways to notify thenames of stations/sidings from and to which trainload consignments could bebooked. In October 1985, it was again clarified by Railway Board thatintention to ask Zonal Railways to notify the names of stations/ sidings was toensure that trainload traffic was booked only between the stations/ sidings thathad adequate facilities to handle traffic in trainload. However, Zonal Railwaysadopted different standards for notifying the names of stations/ sidings. InDecember 1991, Railway Board further clarified that list of stations/ sidings towhich train load traffic can be booked need not necessarily be confined tothose having full rake length capacity.The matter regarding irregular grant of trainload rates, in respect of trafficbooked to a siding not having adequate facilities for handling trainload traffic,was brought to the notice of Railway Board vide para 2.1.4 (v) of Report No.9of 1999. In their Action Taken Note, Railway Board admitted that there wasdetention to the wagons, and issued instructions (February 2004) to all ZonalRailways to review the list of all stations/ sidings notified as capable ofhandling full rakes and de-notify the stations/ sidings which did not haveadequate facilities.A review of records of M/S Indian Aluminium Company Limited (INDAL)revealed that though the siding did not have the capacity to handle full rakes,which has been causing detention to wagons ranging from 2 to 4 days afterallowing free time of nine hours for loading, the siding was notified as capableof handling full rake traffic and trainload rates were allowed to consignor forbooking their traffic. This resulted in loss of revenue of Rs.1.02 crore duringNovember 1998 to March 2005.Though the concessional trainload class was introduced with a view to reducethe cost of operations and improve wagon turn round, Railway Board'ssubsequent orders permitting booking of traffic at trainload class rates from/tostations/ sidings not having adequate facilities, have deviated from the conceptof achieving savings in cost of operations and improving wagon turn round.When the matter was brought to the notice of Railway Administration (May2005) they stated in July 2005 that the capacity of a siding to handle full raketraffic was not the only criteria for granting trainload rates and as perinstructions of the Board, trainload benefit can not be denied to the party ifthey have indented for full rake and offered traffic for full rake.The reply is not acceptable because by allowing trainload rates to trafficbooked from/to stations/sidings not having adequate facilities, Railways havebeen passing on the benefit of concessional rates to traders without achievingthe purported savings in cost of operations by way of improved turn round.The matter was taken up with the Railway Board in October 2005. Their replyhas not been received so far (December 2005).48