05 August,2016 07:38 AM IST | | MiD DAY Correspondent
The state witnessed a gruesome tragedy on the Mumbai-Goa highway on Tuesday after a British-era bridge over the river Savitri collapsed, drowning several vehicles and passengers within
The state witnessed a gruesome tragedy on the Mumbai-Goa highway on Tuesday after a British-era bridge over the river Savitri collapsed, drowning several vehicles and passengers within.
Now, the post-tragedy discussion needs some careful looking into. This paper reported yesterday that authorities sat on a warning issued three years ago by the British government, which said the bridge was well past its expiration date or at the end of its life.
It added that when the tragedy came up for a discussion in the legislature, Public Works Department (PWD) Minister Chandrakant Patil told the assembly that the 88-year-old bridge had been audited for structural stability this May.
Engineers had found it traffic-worthy and the department erected crash barriers on the bridge instead of shutting it down completely. Patil yesterday said the department would inquire whether the audit report was faulty.
We hope this probe, like we see in so many tragedies and incidents, does not simply wither away into the realm of the forgotten. The common man has reason to be sceptical about such probes and explanations touted by authorities post disasters.
Most times, they are short-term salve for wounds, and we never really see any end to these. In fact, at times, we see these bouncing from one committee to the other and then the quest for answers finally comes to a dead end or so much time has elapsed that when the report finally comes out, there is little to be gained at all.
We need quick, result-oriented action on this one. For instance, who were these engineers who carried out the structural audit? Could we go back to the audit and see on what basis was this declared safe? Should this particular firm and if not a firm, independent auditors be asked to give records of earlier structural audits? Finally, should they be given other work and were there any caveats or conditions to that audit, which were ignored?
What lessons can we take back from this tragedy? This is vital rather than the familiar bickering and political point scoring that is currently on.
