CR-BMC feud halts Hancock ROB work

A CONTRACT WAS APPROVED AND THE BRIDGE WORK WAS EXPECTED TO START FROM MARCH 2018

MUMBAI : Despite the Gokhale bridge tragedy that claimed one life, Central Railways (CR) and the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) continue refusing to coordinate and build better amenities for the city.

Construction of the Hancock rail overbridge (RO) which was dismantled by the CR in 2016 was expected to be built by the BMC by 2018, is yet to start. While the civic body is blaming the delay on the shanties on CR land coming in its way, the Railways wants the BMC to get rid of them.

The Hancock Bridge at Sandhurst Road, which was also a heritage structure, was dismantled by the CR as it obstructed trains from passing through. As this was a significant bridge, locals and activists put pressure on the authorities to create an alternative. When the bridge was not constructed, the Bombay high court (HC) intervened in response to a public interest litigation and resolved the matter between the BMC and CR. The court ordered the BMC to build the bridge for which a contract was approved and the work was expected to start from March 2018. The pre-construction work, like piling, bridge design, estimation and utility mapping is complete, and the contractor will go ahead with the construction once the shanties are removed.

An official from the BMC’S bridges department said, “In the court affidavit, the Railways promised to remove the shanties in their jurisdiction while the BMC was supposed to remove the shanties in its area. We are waiting for the CR to remove those structures.”

According to one CR official, the Railways cannot remove the structures as many of them were built before 2000 and are eligible for rehabilitation. Given that the CR does not have a rehabilitation policy, it cannot give the residents of the shanties, alternative accommodation.

The interdepartmental miscommunication between the hydraulic engineering (HE) department and bridges department is also delaying the process. During the excavation work, the bridges department found an old pipeline which supplies water to parts of B, C and E ward, including JJ Hospital. An official from the bridges department said, “Our department does not want to risk the pipeline. The HE department must give us in writing that we will not be held responsible if there is a problem.” An engineer from the HE department said, “The bridges department did find an old pipeline but we have proposed an alternative arrangement for the same.”