Summary:
Rule 5.16 of GR.

Then in 1999 CRS has issued a letter with stringent guidelines, due to which after Electrical Interlocking (EI), the pre-existing movements are being curtailed.
http://www.crs.gov.in/pdf/technical_circulars_pdf/TC.35.pdf

Effectively it means that these stations are better off without EI.

This is a paradox that after using advanced technology than pre-existing ones, the system instead of improving and becoming efficient is becoming inefficient.

Now this has huge repercussions on safety of Train Operations, because compared to 1999, the number of trains have increased drastically, so to cope up with this huge increase in traffic volume without improvement in infrastructure esp yards is a big challenge.

Now at many important stations the condition is very severe because of new restrictions due to EI, and the existing movements are being curtailed due to CRS letter dated 1999, so to cope up with this traffic and new restrictions, there is a possibility that staff might resort to “short-cuts”, as they have no other way out to handle this traffic.

The CRS Letter need to be reviewed since technology has changed drastically in last 2 decades and if we can’t do that then perhaps we should think about stop doing EI at congested stations as it will only worsen the network congestion.

In 2010, Railway Board has examined this issue and issued clarification:

The issue is still persisting because the CRS Circular has not been withdrawn and hence for each project we have to take Dispensation.
Planning Section is given SIP by the S&T Department for approval, and SELECTION TABLE is NOT being prepared by S&T Department rather by the Contractor., in most cases after a delay of 2-3 months, and most cases is not being sent to Planning Department.

Hence due to this circular 35, the operations are suffering.

GM/NR has also raised this issue to CRS in his letter dated May 30,2019