CIC Decision on DRDO Corruption & Nepotism

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 308, B-Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066

File No.CIC/LS/A/2012/001190

Appellant Shri Rajiv Chauhan
Public Authority DRDO
Date of hearing 09.08.2012
Date of decision 09.08.2012

Facts :-
1. Heard today dated 09.08.2012. Appellant present. DRDO is represented by Shri
Deepak Mishra, Scientist ‘E’.
2. The appellant submits that there are a large number of senior scientists who have lived or are living in Government guest houses and yet claiming House Rent Allowance which is contrary to the rules. Thus, they are defrauding the Government. He provides a list of such scientists which is as follows :-

1. Dr. Prahlada, Chief Controller(R&D);
2. Sh. S. Sundaresh, Chief Controller(R&D);
3. Dr. K. Sekhar, Chief Controller(R&D);
4. Dr. r. Sreehari Rao, Chief Controller(R&D);
5. Dr. K.D. Nayak, Chief Controller(R&D);
6. Shri Ravi, Scientist ‘G’, CPIO;
7. Shri S. Sankaran, Director, ER&IPR;
8. Sh. H.V. Ssrinivasa Rao, Director, ISSA;
9. Sh. Ajay Ssingh, Chief Executive;
10. Sh. S. Shanker, Director, DCV&E;
11. Shri R.C. Katoch, Chief Tech Examiner;
12. Sh. B. Choubey, CCE and
13. Sh. Abhay Kumar, CCE.

3. He also produces a copy of the letter dated 17.8.2011 of Dr. Arun Kumar, Director of Personnel, wherein orders for recovery were made. The said letter, addressed to the Directors of all Labs/Establishments for recovery of HRA is reproduced below :-

4. “1. It has been observed that some officers posted to a Lab have stayed/are
staying in DRDO transit facilities/Guest house from the date of their reporting to that station Officers, if have stayed/staying in the DRDO transit facilities/Guest house for more than a month and have simultaneously claimed /claiming HRA for the said period of stay, is against govt. orders/regulations.

2. In view of the above, officers posted at any station who have stayed/staying in
DRDO transit facilities/Guest house for a month or more from their date of reporting and also have claimed/claiming HRA for the said period are required to refund the amount of HRA wrongly claimed forthwith by 15 Sep 2011 through MRO under intimation to the undersigned.
4. This has the approval of the competent authority.

5. The contents of this letter may please be communicated to all concerned.” He wishes to know as to why no recoveries have been effected so far.

6. To this, Shri Mishra would respond that recoveries have been made from all of the scientists.

7. In my opinion, this does not mitigate the irregularity committed in claiming HRA by the above named scientists. Even so, it is to be noted that recoveries have been made from all concerned. If so, the appellant may be informed accordingly in 03 weeks.

Sd/-
( M.L. Sharma )
Information Commissioner

Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against
application and payment of the charges, prescribed under the Act, to the CPIO of this Commission.

( K.L. Das )
Deputy Registrar

Address of parties :-

1. The Scientist ‘F’ & CPIO, DRDO, RTI Cell,
314-A, B-Block, DRDO Bhawan,
New Delhi-110105.

2. Shri Rajiv Chauhan,
1053/3, Shastri Nagar,
Meerut-250005.

The Right to Information Act, 2005

Appeal before the Central Information Commission;

Appeal No. ———————– Dated ————————
As I am aggrieved by decision of Central Public Information Officer and First Appellate

Authority, I hereby file this appeal for your kind decision.
1. Details of appellant:

1.1 Full Name: – RAJIV CHAUHAN

1.2. Full Address: R/O-1053/3, SHASTRI NAGAR, MEERUT (U.P)-250005

1.3 Phone/Cell No.: 09412628314 ; 09258045938 ; 0121-4009512;

4 Email ID: rajivchauhan89@yahoo.co.in

2. Details of Central Public Information Officer (CPIO):

2.1 Name/Designation: Dr.A.K.TYAGI ; SCIENTIST “F’ , CPIO, DRDO HQ;

2.2 Full Address: 314-A, “B’ BLOCK, DRDO BHAWAN, NEW DELHI-110105

2.3 Name of Public Authority: DRDO, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE.

3. Details of First Appellate Authority [FAA]:

3.1 Name/Designation of the FAA: Dr. ARUN KUMAR

3.2 Full Address of FAA: OS & DIRECTOR; DIRECTORATE OF PERSONNEL;

ROOM NO- 217, DRDO BHAWAN, NEW DELHI-110105

4. Dates of RTI application/first appeal:

4.1 To CPIO — 29 OCT 2011

4.2 To FAA: — 17 DEC 2011

5. Particulars of Decisions:

5.1 Reference No & Date of CPIO Decision:-

30 NOV2011; RTI/01/2091/P/2011/0278; CPIO.DRDO HQ; NEW DELHI

5.2 Reference No & Date of FAA’s Decision:-

20 JAN 2012; RTI/02/2091/F/2011/121;

6. Dates of receipt of replies by appellant from:-

6.1 CPIO— 07 DEC 2011

6.2 FAA: — 27 JAN 2012
7. Details of information sought:-

Kindly inform to you that DRDO; Director of Personnel for DG(R&D) issued a recovery of HRA letter no-DOP/03/31000/M/05 DT-17 Aug.2011 that “It has been observed that some officers posted to a lab have stayed / are staying in DRDO transit facilities / Guest house from the date of their reporting to that station. Officers, if have stayed / staying in the DRDO transit facilities / Guest house for more than a month and have simultaneously claimed / claiming HRA for the said period of stay, is against govt orders / regulations.” It seems that a financial irregularity are carried out by the officers / scientist in DRDO. This is a case of the corruption so that the main object to take this information is to provide as an evidence before High Power Investigating Officer/ Commissions / High Courts in the interest of law and justice. I hereby enclosed all related documents for your consideration and action. I want the following information’s as under-

S.No INFORMATION SOUGHT REPLY
1. Pl. provide name of the officers / scientist who availed the facility of the guest house and get / benefited with HRA before issue this above noted letter of DRDO. Pl. provide name of the officers/ scientist.

3. After knowing this financial irregularity / cheating by the officers / scientist, has DRDO taken any action against the corrupt officers as per the law / CCS conduct rule. Pl provide authentic reply.

I state that the information sought does not fall within the restriction in section 8 & 9 of the Act and to the best of my knowledge it pertains in the DRDO office contained & record. Above required information is directly related to corruption and not come under scheduled –II. I request to you please provide me the information by the speed post.

8. Brief facts of the case:-

I submitted my RTI application before the CPIO, DRDO, New Delhi on dt.29-10-2011. Cause for put up this application was the allegation of the corruption / misuse of the office for HRA benefits in their own financial interest after corrupt practices because “ It has been observed that some officers posted to a lab have stayed / are staying in DRDO transit facilities / Guest house from the date of their reporting to that station. Officers, if have stayed / staying in the DRDO transit facilities / Guest house for more than a month and have simultaneously claimed / claiming HRA for the said period of stay, is against govt orders / regulations.” So that financial losses occurred to govt. funds by the corrupt officers / scientists. CPIO reply is not satisfactory and not as per the law because the RTI is related with the allegation of the corruption and not exempted under section 24(1) of the RTI Act-2005.

In his reply FAA mislead to me with the reference of Supreme Court civil Appeal no – 6454. However in this Supreme Court civil Appeal no – 6454,clearly mentioned that- “37. The right to information is a cherished right. Information and right to information are intended to be formidable tools in the hands of responsible citizens to fight corruption and to bring in transparency and accountability. The provisions of RTI Act should be enforced strictly and all efforts should be made to bring to light the necessary information under clause (b) of section 4(1) of the Act which relates to securing transparency and accountability in the working of public authorities and in discouraging corruption.”

I was not satisfied with the reply of CPIO,DRDO HQ, New Delhi, after that I submitted an appeal before FAA to take the information but the FAA of DRDO dismissed the appeal and failed to provide the information with the ref. of second schedule of the RTI Act & section 24(1) of the RTI Act-2005.

9. Reasons/grounds for this appeal:-

1- That this information is directly related with the corruption and misuse of the office and not come under section 24(1) of the RTI Act because Director of Personnel for DG(R&D) issued a recovery of HRA letter no-DOP/03/31000/M/05 DT-17 Aug.2011 . It seems that a financial irregularity are carried out by the officers / scientist in DRDO. So that financial losses occurred to govt. funds by the corrupt officers / scientists.

2- That the main object to take this information is to provide as an evidence before High Power Investigating Officer/ Commissions / High Courts in the interest of law and justice.

10. Any other information in support of appeal:-

CPIO reply against the CIC decision dt-29 Jun 2011on file no-CIC/LS/A/2011/000412 is a clear cut evidence in support of my RTI application related with corruption.(Encl)

11. Prayer/relief sought for:-
I request your honor to pass an order to concern authority to provide the following information’s as under-

2. Pl. provide name of the officers / scientist who availed the facility of the guest house and get / benefited with HRA and after issue this above noted letter of DRDO deposited / returned the HRA. Pl. provide name of the officers/ scientist.
3. After knowing this financial irregularity / cheating by the officers / scientist, has DRDO taken any action against the corrupt officers as per the law / CCS conduct rule. Pl provide authentic reply.

I state that the information sought does not fall within the restriction in section 8 & 9 of the Act and to the best of my knowledge it pertains in the DRDO office contained & record. Above required information is directly related to corruption and not come under scheduled –II. I request your honor to pass an order to concern authority to provide the information’s by the speed post.
(2)- I request your honor to pass an order in favor of the applicant as deemed fit as an any relief .

Personal Presence at hearing:- — YES

Declaration:-

I hereby state that the information and particulars given above are true to the best of my knowledge and belief. I also declare that this matter is not previously filed with this commission nor is pending with any Court or tribunal or authority.
Place: MEERUT

Date: —————- Signature of appellant

Main Menu

Comments

Leave a Reply Cancel reply