ERROR: You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near ') ORDER BY comment_time ASC' at line 3
---
SELECT *, DATE_FORMAT(c.comment_time, '%b %D %Y') AS comment_time2 FROM articles_comments c, articles_users u WHERE u.user_id = c.comment_author AND comment_topic = 6324 AND comment_type = 0 AND (comment_state = 1 OR comment_author = ) ORDER BY comment_time ASC
---
SMs and Station Working Rules. - AISMA - All India Station Masters' Association - The Only Cadre Care for Station Masters


The Only Cadre Care for Station Masters

Welcome

Search:

SMs and Station Working Rules.

View PDF | Print View
by: Admin
Total views: 769
Word Count: 1040


Com.KVV joined KQK (Kottikulam)/ PGT/SR on 07.06.2011 on transfer. After going through the SWR he submitted a letter on 13.06.2011 to the Traffic Inspector of the section duly giving a copy to Sr.DOM/PGT. I reproduce the letter.

”Sir,

I joined KOK station on 7th June 2011. Though I have gone through the SWR and GWR pertaining to KOK station, many a clause contained in both could not be understood. SM/KOK is unable to explain the same to my satisfaction. So I kindly request you visit KOK  to clearing  my doubts and demonstrate safe working of trains, especially during peak hours without violating SWR and safety instructions issued time to time since SM/KOK  is unable to do so.”

On 22.06.2011 Sr.DOM/PGT (Palakkad Dn) advises SM/KQK as under:

“No.J/T/411/I/KQK dated 22.06.2011.

It is noticed that KVV has not taken up independent duty even after 15 days of his joining this station. From the letter the employee had submitted it is understood that he is doubtful about his competence in train operation at this station for which he had raised some issues. On verification it is found that none of these issues had any relevance on safety and absolutely there is no justification on the part of the employee for not taking up duty. The discrepancies mentioned in the letter are being looked into and remedial action if any, being taken there on.”

The letter above is an intimidation and a threat to the community of Station Masters of Indian Railways. Let me have a look at the issue in a wholesome manner.

A Station Master is transferred to a new station. The SM goes through the SWR of the station and comes across impracticable discrepancies in the SWR. He submits a representation requesting a demonstration to enlighten him how to receive and dispatch trains safely.

Under the given circumstances any SM would expect an appropriate response from Sr.DOM. On the other hand the controlling officer and the Disciplinary Authority finds fault with the good Samaritan and the WHISTLE BLOWER. I recall SG’s article in ‘aisma.in’ wherein he has extended the support of the Station Masters of Indian Railways to Shri.Anna Hazare for the fight against corruption. Is it not the duty of the community of the Station Masters of IR to support the WHISTLE BLOWER, Com.K.V.Vijaykumar, DP/PGT now?

Dear Comrades, 

We have a cause and a good case before us. This is the best opportunity to sort out the eternal SWR wrangling once and for all. The Sr.DOM or any authority for that matter cannot compel any SM to execute declaration to the effect that he can receive and dispatch trains safely in the station in question when the SM finds discrepancies in the SWR.

Now let me look at the case on hand.

1.     While Com. KVV has submitted his representation on 13.06.2011 speaking on the discrepancies, the Sr.DOM finds it fine to state that the SM did not take up duty even after 15 days. What he conveniently forgets is the fact that he had slept over the most important matter for 09 days and unhesitatingly blames the SM that he has already wasted 15 days. He is responsible for his lackadaisical attitude towards safety by sleeping over the crucial issue for nine days.

2.     Further while conceding that the SM has brought to his notice the discrepancies the Sr.DOM/PGT dares to state that ‘On verification it is found that none of these issues had any relevance on safety and absolutely there is no justification on the part of the employee for not taking up duty’.

2.1:  If the stand of learned Sr.DOM/PGT is that he had verified the issues and found them irrelevant to safe train operation, then it is absolutely necessary to attach the alleged verification report to Com.KVV along with his letter bearing NO. No.J/T/411/I/ KQK dated 22.06.2011. On the other hand the officer abstractly states that the discrepancies were verified and found to be not relevant. It is time Sr.DOM/PGT realized that such orders are arbitrary, perverse and unlawful and no SM will succumb to such threat or coercion.

3.     The somersault of the Sr.DOM comes in the very next sentence, “The discrepancies mentioned in the letter are being looked into”. Thank God, he is not totally UNFAIR. But our query is: “HOW CAN YOU FORCE HIM TO TAKE UP DUTY WHEN YOU CONCEDE THAT THE DISCREPANCIES ARE BEING LOOKED INTO?”

3.1:  We thank him for his fairness for conceding that the discrepancies are being looked into. But the fairness once again vanishes when he tries to be smart by stating,” remedial action if any, being taken there on”. A smarter man will certainly ask without hesitation, “Mr.DOM, you blame the SM that since 15 days he has not taken up duty. If you opine that the SM has wasted 15 days how can you state after 15 days that remedial action, if any, being taken there on? Then what were you doing all these days since is evident from your letter that you were aware that the SM has been waiting for your instructions right from 13.06.2011?

3.2:  It is further strange that he dares to state that remedial action if any will be taken which is DIRECTLY CONTRADICTING HIS OWN EARLIER VERSION IN THE PREVIOUS SENTENCE THAT ‘ON VERIFICATION IT WAS FOUND THAT NONE OF THESE (meaning the discrepancies raised by Com.KVV) HAD ANY RELEVANCE ON SAFETY? If Sr.DOM/PGT has already verified and found no such discrepancy then how he goes to state in the very next sentence that the discrepancies are being looked into?

3.3:  SWR is a sort of JOINT PROCEDURAL DOCUMENT counter signed by DOM and DSTE. How come Sr.DOM concludes that he has verified and found nothing adverse without the consent of DSTE as he has not spoken on the concurrence of DSTE on the matter in the letter?

Well, we can go on but we prefer to stop it all there.

The issue shall be taken up with utmost seriousness by PGT Divisional body, Zonal body of SR and the Central body of AISMA.

Best of luck, Com.KVV,


G.Rajan, Rtd SM/SBC.Dn(M)9448293295;email:rajan.iyer@ymail.COM

About the Author

G.Rajan is one of the victim for the  SWR violation and circumvent in the same situation in SBC Division and  the right man to share his Feelings.


Rating: Not yet rated
Login to vote

Comments

No comments posted.

Add Comment

You do not have permission to comment. If you log in, you may be able to comment.