Khanna probe: 4 years later, no report but just bitterness

Board officials alleged that Justice Garg seemed to in no hurry to submit his report as he was enjoying facilities provided by the Railways like a regular salary, a house, a car and staff.

But Justice Garg, when contacted in Chandigarh, lashed back. ‘‘When the Railways do not want any outside interference in their functioning, what is the point of constituting a judicial commission of inquiry? I have come to believe that there is no point in appointing any such commission,’’ he said.

Railway Minister Nitish Kumar, when contacted, said he did not want to react to Justice Garg’s charges. ‘‘We cannot do much in case of judicial inquiries. Inquiries by Commissioners of Railway Safety (CRS) are faster. But sometimes due to public pressure we have to institute judicial commissions,’’ he said. CRS reports on the derailment of Rajdhani Express, killing 120 at Rafiganj in September this year, and that of Shramjivi Express on May 12, 2002, killing 15, have been submitted. Both have blamed the mishaps on sabotage.

Justice Garg even raised doubts about the action taken on probe reports. ‘‘All reports find their way into the dustbin and there is hardly any remedial action. Justice G.N. Ray gave his report on Gaisal accident. What happened to it?’’ he questioned.

On allegations that he was delaying the inquiry because of the perks he enjoyed, Garg pointed out that he had drawn a salary from the Railways for only 10 months in the past four years — August 1999 to February 2000, and from August 2002 to October 2002. ‘‘Railways officials are talking nonsense. I am staying in my own house and only get some token house rent allowance from them,’’ he added.

Explaining the delay, he said: ‘‘The commission was appointed in March 1999 and the office was made available to me in December 1999. However, in March 2000, I was appointed Vice-Chairman, Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG), and I gave my resignation from the inquiry commission stating that I would not be able to do justice. The Railways kept it on hold for eight months and finally told me to carry on with the inquiry. All this time was wasted.’’

He added: ‘‘The Commission’s counsel resigned in October 2001 and the Railways did not appoint a new one for a long time. All this delayed the inquiry further.’’ Then there were other problems like tracing witnesses, getting them to cooperate and, more importantly, getting railway officials to cooperate. ‘‘I don’t want to say anything more against the officials at this stage. But it was not easy dealing with them,’’ said Garg. The report, he claimed, should be submitted latest by March 2003 ‘‘if all goes well.’’ Statements of most witnesses have been recorded.