Public seek rail over bridge, HC rules in favour of subway

The first bench comprising Chief Justice AP Sahi and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy noted that the choice of constructing a subway (RUB) was based on empirical consideration and technical assessment, and directed the Railways to take care of the problem of waterlogging that was highlighted by the petitioner.

The Arani Constituency MP MK Vishnu Prasad had written to the Railways to stop construction of the subway and instead build a ROB, while the villagers staged a protest seeking the railway administration to either construct a flyover or let it remain as a level crossing.

According to the local public, water stagnation in the tunnel during the rainy season would interrupt the smooth flow of traffic, and added that heavy vehicles and harvest vehicles would not be able to pass through the subway. Noting that there was a lake near the site, the villagers said the water catchment would be high and water stagnation in the subway may force them to take a 20 km long detour to reach the cities. They added that similar projects had failed in many places.

However, the Railways submitted that as per its norms, the train vehicle unit (TVU) should be more than one lakh to construct an of ROB at a level crossing. But official records show that the traffic density at this particular level crossing as on 2017 was 40,256 TVUs, and hence it did not qualify for a ROB.

It added that the box size to be provided there was 4.50m x 4.75m in clear, which would ensure that harvesting machines, sugarcane vehicles, buses, lorries, etc. would easily pass through the subway. Also, drainage facilities like collection well with high HP diesel and electrical pumps would be provided at the subway for removing stagnant water during the rainy season.