SUBJECT : Complaint against Dr A K Saxena, Director, DMSRDE, DRDO, Kanpur
DRDO has an approved policy for guiding various procurements (Purchase Management –2006 document issued vide Govt. letter No DMM/PP/0000205/M/868/D(R&D) dated 22nd March 2006 amended vide letter No DMM/PP/0000206/M/2386/D(R&D) dated 21st Aug 2006
CORRIGENDUM No: 2 DMM/II/PP/0000207/M/3041/D(R&D) dated 15th Oct 2007
CORRIGENDUM No: 3 DMM/II/PP/0000208/M/3201/D(R&D) dated 16th Sept 2008
CORRIGENDUM No: 4 DMM/II/PP/0000210/P1/92/D(R&D) dated 14th Jan 2011
However, every Director of DRDO Labs has fixed their own agent (supplier) who can supply from needle to missile components or any high tech components/systems. In fact to this agent is always behind each and every supply national or international. This agent searches the world market and identifies a manufacturer / suppliers and obtains the details & specification and passed to Director for further procurement.
The following case is the example of modus oprendi of procurement case which directly benefit the lab director.
- DMSRDE wanted to procure 50 Lit. High Temperature Reaction System.
- Dr A K Saxena, Director, DMSRDE, DRDO , Kanpur discussed this requirement with his pet supplier M/s Manglam Traders, Kanpur
- Mr Anish Gupta from M/s Manglam Traders sends a mail to Dr A K Saxena on 6th December 2011
Subject: “Offer for High Temp. Reaction Unit”
“The line diagram attached is not exactly as per their offer, they have forwarded us understand it will be somehow like the same. As per our line of requirement they will send us in 2 to 3 days.” Attached two file with this mail
(i) DMSRDE_Techno-Commercial_Reaction-unit-50lit (enclosed)
(ii) IPID0022 (enclosed)
4. Dr A K Saxena forwarded this mail to Sh J N Srivastava , Scientist ‘F’ indenter on 22 Dec 2011.
5. The DMSRDE_Techno-Commercial_Reaction-unit-50 lit proposal was originally send by the manufacturer “De Dietrich Process Systems India Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai” REF: DDI/DMSRDE/534. DATE: 30th Nov 2011. In thirteen page proposal with specification and terms of condition and in page ten of price quoted Rs 62,50,000/- .
6. In DRDO procurement policy lab Directors have power to sign up to 50 lakhs only.
Since the cost was escalating the limit, so Dr A K Saxena asked M/s Manglam to split the quote.
7. As desired by Dr A K Saxena, Mr Anish, partner of M/s Manglam again send a mail on 27th Feb 2012
Subject : “LAB REACTOR”
“As per your discussion held with Mr. Manish enclosed please find here polycarbosilane reactor splitted in two quotes along with their technical prposal and specs for Tender Enquriy”. Attached five files with this mail
(i) Specification for High Temp. Reaction Overhead System (enclosed)
(ii) DMSRDE_Techno-Commercial_50lit_High_Temp_Reactor-Price_Bid (enclosed)
(iii) DMSRDE_Techno-Commercial_Reaction_Overhead_assembly-Technical_Bid (enclosed)
(iv) DMSRDE_Techno-Commercial_Reaction-unit-50lit (enclosed)
(v) Specification for 50 liter High Temp. MONEL Reactor (enclosed)
9. The case split in two i. –High Temp. Reaction Overhead System – price quoted Rs 28,50,000/-
ii.- 50 Ltrs. High Temp. Monel Reactor – price quoted Rs 38,50,000/-
10. Dr A K Saxena forwarded this mail to Sh J N Srivastava, Scientist ‘F’ intender on 2 March 2012.
11. Amazing, a supplier dictates the specifications and quotations details of tender enquiry this is the harsh reality and modus oprendi of DRDO procurement scenario.
12. As dictated by supplier/agent the demands raised by
13 Reactor was deliberately split into two parts in budget forecast and two separate FBE numbers allotted to bring the purchase within Director’s power by Dr A K Saxena.
14. Two Technical Evaluation Committees one headed by Dr. D N Tiphati and the other by Mr. Darshan Lal clear the split cases and Dr. Sarfaz Alam Chairman of Store Purchase Committee clears these split cases on the same day.
15. Mr J N Srivastava, Scientist ‘F’ indenter protests by saying that “The splitting of one item into two is against the purchase procedure of DRDO and CVC’s guidelines“. Dr A K Saxena forced him to process case in split way because of DRDO Directors having absolute power and absolute power means absolute corruption..
16. However on 12th October 2013, Dr A K Saxena sends a memo DP/15 to Mr J N Srivastava strangely enquiring as to why this case of reactor was split and not purchased as a single unit. Dr A K Saxena is not satisfied with the reply of Mr J N Srivastava that he was instructed by Dr. Ashok Rajan the programme Director to indent and instead pressurizing Mr J N Srivastava to justify the unjustable.
17. Till date the reactor was not assembled and poor tax payer money was wasted, although the payment was not cleared but manpower cost of project was wasted in the interest of Dr A K Saxena.
18. Poly-di-methyle-saline (PDMS) cannot be processed and converted into Polycarbosailine as a product without assembling both the parts of reactor.
19. Poly-di-methyle-saline (PDMS) already purchased worth lakhs of rupees from Dr A K saxena’s pet supplier (Mr Anish Gupta) The PDMS case will send separately.
20. Dr A K Saxena violated all the laid down DRDO procurement rules mentioned above.
21. It is requested that the case may thoroughly examined keeping mind to cost to benefit ratio and the role of DRDO Hqrs rep and PCDA (R&D) involvement. Fix the accountabilities and booked the culprits at the earliest.
Annexure – 7
- Specification for High Temp. Reaction Overhead System
- Specification for 50 liter High Temp. MONEL Reactor