Tags:
Journalism of Courage
MUMBAI, August 11: Building collapses are caused by several factors: bad supervision or engineering could be just one of them. It would be wrong to hold a structural engineer responsible for a collapse even before a fact-finding committee completes its enquiry, claimed a group of professionals from the construction industry today.
Based on this premise, at a press conference organised by the Maharashtra India chapter of the American Concrete Institute, the professionals rallied against what they termed the unilateral8217; decision on the part of the state government to revoke the licenses of engineer R N Raiker and architect Arun Ogale in the aftermath of the Govinda Towers collapse at Bandra. The association expressed dissent, disagreement and protest8217; and urged the government to reconsider8217; its decision by withdrawing the suspension orders.
8220;It is like a game of kho-kho,8221; said Gurunath Dalvi, honorary joint secretary of the Practising Engineers, Architects and Town planners Association PEATA, 8220;where one person puts the blame on somebody, who then passes it on to another8221;. Staunchly defending their colleague, the engineers argued that there should be an annual auditing of all buildings, with co-operative societies taking the onus of maintaining the structure. They came down heavily on the inclination of flat owners towards large scale alterations and interior decorations which inevitably endanger the structures.
8220;What is at a discount here is trustworthiness. Nobody believes the office- bearer of a society if he denies a flat owner the permission for analteration,8221; said Narendra Patel, chairperson of the architects8217; group of the Institution of Engineers. Likening the role of a structural engineer checking the stability of a structure on an annual basis to a family physician, Patel added that the engineer could then be consulted for any alterations to be made.
Striking a note of dissent was A P Remedios, a construction consultant, who pointed out that while the structural engineer as a doctor8217; could be excellent in his role, 8220;the fact is that the construction business today has no trained nurses or matrons to help him8221;. The absence of trained supervisors at the site and of a resident engineer during the construction was one of the greatest drawbacks of the system, he claimed. 8220;India must be the only country which gives its civil engineers a degree without any practical knowledge,8221; he alleged.
As far as the R N Raikar case was concerned, as per BMC records, Raikar was the structural engineer of Govinda Towers during its construction. He had beenappointed by the civic body again in 1995 to get the structure rechecked after complaints about its stability first cropped up in 1995.
However, Structwell Designers and Consultants , the company of R N Raikar, had, after their assessment intimated the civic body of the 8220;on going additions and alterations in the internal layout, 8230;work carried out without sound construction8230;indicating on going damage leading to structure corrosion8221;. He had also suggested 8220;major structural repairs to corrosion damaged concrete,8221; adding that the damage was arising out of major neglect on part of the occupants.
