Introduction / Context:
A major rail disaster requires accountability, relief, and prevention. Suitable courses of action must address immediate needs and longer-term safety enhancements.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- Derailment on a bridge; train fell into river; 65 fatalities.
- Courses: I) Railways to clarify reasons to Government; II) Government to allocate funds for compensation and relief; III) Strengthen bridge protection walls to avoid such accidents.
Concept / Approach:
Evaluate necessity across three horizons: investigation/accountability, relief/compensation, and engineering controls to prevent recurrence. All three are logically linked to the incident.
Step-by-Step Solution:
I (clarify reasons): Formal inquiry and reporting to the Government are essential for accountability and corrective action. Follows.II (allocate funds): Immediate relief, compensation to victims, and infrastructure repair require funds. Follows.III (strengthen protection walls): Engineering controls like guard rails, check-rails, and stronger parapets can mitigate derailment consequences on bridges. Follows.
Verification / Alternative check:
Standard post-accident protocol includes inquiry (Commissioner of Railway Safety), ex-gratia, and infrastructure upgrades based on findings.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Any subset ignores a key dimension (accountability, relief, or prevention) necessary after such a disaster.
Common Pitfalls:
Treating compensation as optional, or neglecting engineering prevention after a bridge-related derailment.
Final Answer:
All follow
Discussion & Comments