Which are heritage railways?

Which are India’s heritage railways? That should be an easy question to answer and heritage railways need not necessarily be equated with mountain railways. The standard list will include Darjeeling Himalayan (DHR), Nilgiri Mountain (NMR) and Kalka Shimla (KSR). But there are more. A heritage line means a stretch of track that will not be subjected to gauge conversion. It will be maintained as narrow or metre gauge, as the case may be.  In the case of narrow gauge, as far as I can make out, the list is (1) Kangra Valley Railway (KVR, 164 km); KSR (94 km); (3) DHR (80 km); (4) Matheran Hill Railway (MHR, 20 km); and (5) Gwalior Sheopur Kalan section (198 km) of Gwalior Light Railway (GLR). There is only one identified stretch of track for metre gauge, NMR (46 km). Therefore, there will be six heritage lines and everything else will be converted to broad gauge. The two surprises in this list are KVR and Gwalior Sheopur Kalan. I repeat, this list is based on my impressions and I think it would be a good idea for IR (Indian Railways) to come out with a clear list of what will be preserved as heritage.

Take KVR as an example. This is the stretch from Pathankot Junction to Jogindernagar and it goes back to 1929 (commissioned in 1926). Today, KVR has toy trains that trundle along at an average speed of less than 20 km/hour and one can also charter exclusive special trains. If the idea is to link Pathankot to Leh via Manali, something will have to be done about this stretch. Convert the stretch from Pathankot to Jogindernagar to broad gauge, extend it to Mandi and build a new Bilaspur-Mandi-Leh broad gauge link. The link from Pathankot to Leh will be via Mandi. These are important strategic transport links in parts of the country that have historically been deprived of railway networks. Apart from strategic issues, rail connectivity also enhances tourism potential. Several surveys have been done of all these stretches. Let me quote from the Railway Minister’s Budget Speech in 2011-12. Jogindernagar to Mandi was one of the stretches that “will be completed by the end of this financial year”. That wasn’t done of course and there hasn’t been much movement on the other bits either. The topography doesn’t lend itself to easy construction and IR finances must also have been an issue. I have some figures that are about five years old. Bilaspur-Leh Rs 230 billion, Jogindernagar-Mandi Rs 1.3 billion and broad gauging of Pathankot-Jogindernagar Rs 33 billion.

However, other than these two obvious reasons, there must have been some discussion about whether to convert KVR to broad gauge, or whether to retain its heritage status. The cake will now be kept and also eaten, in the sense that a new broad gauge link will be built, but the old narrow gauge KVR will also be retained. That’s the sense I get and I think it would be a good idea for IR to clearly state this. Much the same can be said of Gwalior Sheopur Kalan. GLR’s historical antecedents are older than those of KVR. One goes back to 1895 for the Gwalior-Bhind bit, though Gwalior-Sheopur Kalan is 1904 vintage. Note that Gwalior-Bhind and Gwalior-Shivpuri parts of GLR have already been converted to broad gauge and there is also a proposal to convert Gwalior-Sheopur Kalan to broad gauge at a cost of Rs 12 billion. (This cited figure seems to me to be on the low side.) Note also that because it is not commercially viable, no trains run on this narrow gauge section any more. This flags viability issues about heritage lines, once we clearly identify them. But what’s the decision on this segment? Will it be converted to broad gauge or will it be retained as a heritage line? Or like KVR, will we eat the cake and also keep it? Remember that India has proposed to Unesco that GLR should be considered for heritage status. Here too, a clear statement from IR will help.

This is also required because IR has started to focus a bit more on heritage. There is an inventory of locomotives, buildings, stations, coaches, wagons, bridges, tunnels and viaducts. On each of these, the definition of “heritage” is subjective. It is essentially left to the zones to decide what is heritage. I am not suggesting one can have an across the board definition of what is heritage, such as one does with vintage cars or manuscripts under National Manuscript Mission. But whether it is for these, or whether it is for legislation protecting antiquities and art treasures, there is an attempt to impart some objectivity and precision. The item of heritage that should be easiest to pin down is heritage railways, with KVR and that GLR segment clearly excluded or included. Apparently, there is some intention to distance heritage issues from regular IR functioning, by setting up a distinct body, such as a Heritage Trust or Society. With flexibility to set tariffs and bring in external sources of private funding, heritage railways and museums are probably the easiest to make self-financing, at least for revenue expenditure. At least, this model has worked in some other countries. In fairness, in countries like Britain, private funding and distancing has meant much more. Heritage railways are owned by private entities. We may eventually get there. 

The author is chairman, Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister. Views are personal