Passengers are up against officials for the delay of train No. 06580 Visakhapatnam-Yesvantapur Tatkal fare weekly special for the second consecutive week, at the originating station.
Instead of taking remedial action on the complaints and protests on Twitter by passengers of this train last week (July 15), the railway officials failed to maintain the punctuality of this train for the second consecutive week on July 22, evoking another round of protests on Twitter.
A railway official attributed the 58 minute delay of 06580 Tatkal Special at the originating station to the bunching of trains and expressed ‘deep regret for the inconvenience’.
A Twitter user attributed the delay to the ‘intentional delay’ on the part of the officials. Last run same scenario, tweeted @Samuel John Wesley. A frequent traveller said the train was allowed to leave after five other trains left the station.
After entering South Central Railway (SCR) jurisdiction also, this train was further delayed. The passengers tweeted to the DRM, Vijayawada, seeking to know the reason for the detention of 06580 at Narasingapalli for 15 mins.
Meanwhile, there is no announcement yet on extension of the Yesvantapur-Visakhapatnam-Yesvantapur weekly tatkal fare express, While the last run of train no 06579 is July 27 (ex-Yesvantapur) and for train no 06580 it is July 29 (ex-Visakhapatnam).
This is the only dedicated train from Visakhapatnam to reach Bengaluru for the people of Visakhapatnam and north Andhra region, after the Bengaluru – Visakhapatnam Prasanthi Express, was extended to Bhubaneswar in the past.
Train no.06580 is very convenient for techies from this region, employed in Bengaluru, to return to Vizag for the weekend and leave on Sunday afternoon to reach their offices by Monday morning. This train is being run as a special train since Oct 30, 2016, despite having consistently high patronage.
Rail users have been demanding regularisation of the Yesvantpur train for a long time.
They have been complaining on Twitter that this train is being continued as a ‘special’ by ECoR to delay it ‘intentionally’ and thereby deprive it of the prospect of regularisation.
B. Madhu Gopal
