Speech of Mr. H. R. Masani in the Lok Sabha on February 27, 1964, while moving a cut motion on the Railway Budget

Summary

In the rendered pages, H. R. Masani moves a cut motion on the 1964–65 Railway Budget to press for expedited construction of the broad-gauge link from Jhunda to Kandla and its alignment through Saurashtra. He argues that the existing metre-gauge network is inadequate for the region’s development and that a broad-gauge line should connect Kandla with Gujarat and Rajasthan as well as with heavily populated and industrial centres such as Morvi, Wankaner, and Surendranagar. Masani cites regional public opinion, a Rajkot Chamber of Commerce telegram, and the Gujarat Transport Parishad’s discussion of the project in support of an urgent decision.

In the rendered pages, Masani contrasts a shorter route across the northern perimeter of Saurashtra with an alternative through Morvi, Wankaner, and Surendranagar. He favours the latter because it would serve more people, stimulate industrialisation, and connect the railway to existing centres of economic activity, while urging the Railway Ministry not to let competing alternatives become an excuse for delay. The supplementary extract on pages 3–4 records Deputy Minister S. V. Ramaswamy’s reply: the government is assessing expected port and passenger traffic, the relative costs and benefits of the routes, and the need to use public funds prudently, but he assures the House that a decision will be taken and that Saurashtra will not be disappointed.

Key points

• Masani supports a cut motion concerning the delayed broad-gauge connection between Jhunda and Kandla.
• He presents Saurashtra’s metre-gauge network as insufficient for regional development and industrial growth.
• He argues that the route through Morvi, Wankaner, and Surendranagar would serve more populous and industrial areas than the shortest proposed route.
• A Rajkot Chamber of Commerce telegram is cited as evidence of broad regional support for the alternative alignment.
• Masani asks the Railway Ministry to reconcile its technical assessment with public opinion and to avoid further delay.
• Deputy Minister S. V. Ramaswamy replies that traffic forecasts, port prospects, route costs, and passenger demand are being evaluated.
• The minister frames the decision as a matter of responsible stewardship of national railway funds while promising eventual construction.