If the Railways are heading towards becoming a basket case it has only itself to blame, for it has institutionalised on a grand scale a populist approach to its growth.

Undoubtedly in this march to bankruptcy it has been ably aided by a string of political heavyweights adorning the corner room in Rail Bhavan, starting with Jaffer Sharief in 1991, followed by Suresh Kalmadi, Ram Vilas Paswan, Nitish Kumar, Ram Naik, Mamata Banerjee, once again Nitish Kumar, Lalu Yadav, once again Mamata Banerjee, Dinesh Trivedi and Mukul Roy.

The ?rail users consultative committees?, formed periodically to get user feedback, have over the decades degenerated into a coterie of political wheeler-dealers. Thrice every year meetings of the DRUCC (divisional railway users consultative committee) are held in each of the 68 divisions, and the suggestions flow into ZRUCC (zonal railway users consultative committee) on each of the 16 railway zones, whose members add their own respective demands.

These are ultimately considered by NRUCC (national railway users consultative committee), the apex body duly presided over by the rail minister, often in a marathon two-day conclave. The railway board mandarins are consulted on the feasibility and desirability of these suggestions, and then announced in the yearly rail budget.

Often considered a status symbol, some hectic lobbying is made in to get nominated to these consultative committees with the appointment of a new rail minister. Invariably it ends up being packed with self-styled representatives of a plethora of passengers? associations and of course the people?s representatives viz. MLAs, MPs, et al.

The committee members leave no stone unturned, often fiercely vying with each other, to get optimum goodies for their areas of activity. Undoubtedly a measure of their clout is introduction of new passenger trains from their respective towns or cities.For the rail minister and the local political heavyweights, the photo opportunity offered by the inauguration of a new train or even the extension of an existing one is invaluable. However, with unrealistically low passenger fares, which has not seen an upward revision for eight straight years, each new passenger train takes the Railways a step closer to eventual bankruptcy.

Moreover, with over 3,000 such new trains having been added over the last two decades, the window available for maintenance in most high density sections?where the use of mechanised track-maintenance machines is now inescapable?has been severely narrowed.

It is no surprise that despite the large-scale inputs of heavier rails and track machines over the last decade, there has been no significant reduction in derailments. Of course, the added stress of overloaded wagons, thanks to Lalu Yadav?s ill-advised hike on loadability of wagons, has also contributed to the mess.

With the populist embargo on passenger tariff for eight long years, freight tariff had to be hiked every year, sometimes even mid-term, to balance the budget. As a result, nearly 6,000 freight trains end up earning almost two-thirds of the revenue, while the 16,000 passenger trains, including 5,000 suburban ones, collect the smaller pie of one-third.

While a third of the hundreds of suggestions every year are concerning passenger trains and related amenities, the remaining are for scores of new financially unviable projects?euphemistically called ?socially desirable? projects?which the rail minister accepts, given the political compulsions. The result? Wastage of scarce funds, with thousands of financially unviable projects stuck in the pipeline?worth R80,000 crore at the last count.

The craze for starting scores of new trains perhaps started with Kamalapati Tripathi, who was minister for railways about four decades ago. While for the minister it may be a small price to pay for buying goodwill, the havoc these new trains play on the rail network is incalculable.

The author is former member, Railway Board