Disclaimer   
News Super Search
 ♦ 
×
Member:
Posting Date From:
Posting Date To:
Category:
Zone:
Language:
IR Press Release:

Search
  Go  
Full Site Search
  Search  
 
Tue Jan 24, 2017 23:05:18 ISTHomeTrainsΣChainsAtlasPNRForumGalleryNewsFAQTripsLoginFeedback
Tue Jan 24, 2017 23:05:18 IST
Advanced Search
Trains in the News    Stations in the News   
<<prev entry    next entry>>
News Entry# 287914
  
Dec 07 2016 (20:13)  Statewise Length of Railway Lines and Survey For New Railway Lines (pib.nic.in)
back to top
Commentary/Human Interest

News Entry# 287914   Blog Entry# 2083643     
   Tags   Past Edits
This is a new feature showing past edits to this News Post.

Posted by: rdb*^  125013 news posts
As on 31.3.2016, the state-wise length of railway lines in terms of Route Kilometers’ is as under :

NAME OF STATE
ROUTE KILOMETRES
ANDHRA
...
more...
PRADESH
3703.25
ARUNACHAL PRADESH
11.67
ASSAM
2442.57
BIHAR
3730.57
CHHATISGARH
1212.91
DELHI
183.23
GOA
69.31
GUJARAT
5258.49
HARYANA
1710.49
HIMACHAL PRADESH
296.26
JAMMU & KASHMIR
298.19
JHARKHAND
2394.46
KARNATAKA
3281.36
KERALA
1045.36
MADHYA PRADESH
5000.00
MAHARASHTRA
5745.48
MANIPUR
1.35
MEGHALAYA
8.76
MIZORAM
1.50
NAGALAND
11.13
ODISHA
2572.16
PUNJAB
2269.27
RAJASTHAN
5893.10
SIKKIM
0.00
TAMIL NADU
4027.08
TELANGANA
1736.67
TRIPURA
192.54
UTTARAKHAND
339.80
UTTAR PRADESH
9077.45
WEST BENGAL
4135.19
UNION TERRITORIES
NAME OF UNION TERRITORY
ROUTE KILOMETRES
CHANDIGARH
15.70
PUDUCHERRY
22.16
ANDMAN & NICOBAR
0.00
TOTAL:ALL INDIA
66687.46

263 numbers of new line surveys have been taken up in the country. Surveys require investigation of one or more routes, in consultation with State Governments and Forest Department, to decide the most technically feasible alignment, interaction with State Government, trade and industries for assessment of traffic projections, preparation of plans and drawings for calculation of costs etc. Since this is an extensive exercise, it is not possible to fix time lines for completion of surveys.

This Press Release is based on the information given by the Minister of State for Railways Shri Rajen Gohain in a written reply to a question in Lok Sabha on 07.12.2016 (Wednesday).

****

AKS/MKV/DK


(Release ID :155019)

4 posts - Wed Dec 07, 2016 - are hidden. Click to open.

8 posts - Thu Dec 08, 2016 - are hidden. Click to open.

  
668 views
Dec 10 2016 (16:19)
So Paddy Got Up~   2651 blog posts   1236 correct pred (71% accurate)
Re# 2083643-14            Tags   Past Edits
it, in my opinion, actually distorts the picture. this is because many rail lines in India in the most populated region carry far more than their sanctioned capacity. routes leading out of mumbai towards north, ALD-MGS section, ET-AGC etc carry more trains than the number they were designed for, and hence while 1 Km track per thousand people may correspond to 'x' number of trains (x<1) in other place it may correspond to 1.6x or even 2x if the network is heavily loaded.
unless some correction factor compensating for overload is involved, the picture depicted by the rail density per 1000 Km is going to be rather wrong, ending up showing far rosy picture in areas with rail lines but facing neglect
...
more...
from IR w.r.t new trains, and painting a negative picture of regions blessed with trains.

  
632 views
Dec 10 2016 (16:33)
180 years of Railways in India~   2150 blog posts
Re# 2083643-15            Tags   Past Edits
Agreed. I only suggested having the population numbers so that people don't interpret the route lengths at face value. Historically, the Gangetic plains UP and Bihar had the highest population density ( not relevant now probably), so these areas had a much higher track density than most areas in the rest of the country and as such, even during the British Raj itself, these areas had a much denser railway network than anywhere else in the country. So, even if subsequent developments have been tainted by bias from the government, these places already had a head start compared to the rest of the country. Biased government or not, they are bound to be at the top of the table. I wanted the population data to be included so that the reason behind the disparity is made clear.
Scroll to Top
Scroll to Bottom


Go to Mobile site