All posts by Prabhu

Drdo

First Appeal – Parking – DMSRDE

1 Comment

FIRST APPEAL U/S 19(1) OF Right to Information Act, 2005

To,
  Shri Suranjan Pal,
  OS & Director DECS,
 First Appellate Authority, DRDO
  RTI Cell, Room No. 240/B , 
  DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg
  New Delhi-110011

Subject: First Appeal under Section 19(1) of RTI Act 2005

Reference: Letter No. DMS/0369/RTI/101/69/Letter_2013 dated 29 October 2013 issued by CPIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur

Sir,

I am distressed by above referred decision of Public Information Officer, DMSRDE, Kanpur. I hereby submit this appeal u/s 19(1) of RTI Act 2005 for your kind consideration & decision.

1.   Details of appellant:-applicant2.   Details of Central Public Information Officer (CPIO):-cpio kanpur

3. Particulars of Decision/Order of CPIO against which appeal:-

Decision vide letter No. DMS/0369/RTI/101/69/Letter_2013 dated 29 October 2013 received by appellant on 04 November 2013. Copy enclosed as Enclosure -1.

4. Brief facts leading to appeal:-

(a)          An application under Section 6(1) of RTI Act 2005 dated 04 October 2013 was submitted to CPIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur for providing information regarding “Parking“. Copy of the RTI Application dated 04 October 2013 is enclosed as Enclosure-2.

(b)          Central Public Information Officer, DMSRDE, Kanpur rejected the application u/s 24(1) of RTI Act 2005 vide letter No. DMS/0369/RTI/101/69/Letter_2013 dated 29 October 2013 although it was clearly mentioned in RTI application that required information is directly related to the allegations of Corruption and not come under Schedule-II.

(c)          It was clearly mentioned in RTI application dated 04 October 2013 that “Central Information Commission in its various decisions consistently held that establishment matters relating to the organization notified u/s 24 of the RTI Act come within the purview of the Act and information in this regard thereto are not exempted from disclosure”.

(d)          In point (c) (1) of reply dated 29 October, 2013 CPIO informed that “Director, DMSRDE, Kanpur has not ordered for construction of any vehicle parking stand inside DMSRDE not being constructed”. It was also mentioned “Other information related to vehicle stand are also irrelevant and not applicable”.

(e)          In point (d)(2) of reply dated 29 October, 2013 CPIO informed that “Regarding CSD Canteen, its functioning has started from 21st April 1977 and running continuously. The other information asked has no relevance with the allegations of Corruption. It is a social welfare activity and run in authorized manner with manually agreed terms & conditions of DMSRDE and MES office of, DMSRDE, Kanpur”.

(f)           CPIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur rejected the RTI application dated 04 October 2013 on invalid, illegal, ultra vires & false reasons with malafide intentions to linger on the process of seeking information with an ulterior motive under direction of Director, DMSRDE, Kanpur (The Public Authority). This act of CPIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur attracts action on CPIO u/s 20 of RTI Act 2005.

(g)          Appellant is intensely upset by the decision of CPIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur and this leads to appellant to file an appeal u/s 19(1) of RTI Act 2005.

5.   Reasons/Grounds for First Appeal:-

First Appeal is submitted to First Appellate Authority on following reasons/grounds.

(a)       Under the provisions of Section 24(1)  of RTI Act 2005 the organisation notified under II Schedule of the Act are exempted from the information except when the information pertained allegations of corruption and human rights violations only.

(b)       Appellant submitted an application dated 04 October 2013 under Section 6(1) of RTI Act 2005 to CPIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur for   providing information as mentioned in application dated 04 October 2013 enclosed as Enclosure 2 to this FA.

(c)        Information was denied by CPIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur on the ground that “DRDO is placed in Second Schedule of RTI Act, 2005 and is exempted from disclosure of Information under Section 24(1) except for information pertaining to the allegations of Corruptions and Human Rights Violations“.

(d)       The information sought by the appellant vide his application dated 04 October 2013 does not comes u/s 24(1) of the Act as per consistent views and decisions of Central Information Commission in various cases regarding organisation notified in Schedule II like DRDO as information sought is related to Establishment Matter and allegations of Corruption.

(e)       Information was denied on false and illegal grounds with malafide intentions to harass the appellant for getting the information.

(f)         CPIO is not aware of recent views and decisions of CIC regarding DRDO (notified organisation under Schedule II), thereby he misused Section 24(1) of the Act for denial of Information.

(g)       Appellant is deeply distressed by invalid decision of CPIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur, hence the First Appeal u/s 19(1) of RTI Act 2005 before FAA.

6.   Prayer /relief sought for:-

  1. Information sought vides RTI Application dated 04 October 2013 by appellant has been denied on false and invalid reasons by CPIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur. Therefore, appellant kindly prays to FAA, DRDO to allow this appeal and issue instructions/orders to CPIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur to provide the information sought as seek by appellant vide his RTI Application dated 04 October 2013.
  2. Direction may kindly be issued to CPIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur to work as per provisions of RTI Act 2005 and guidelines established in CIC decisions.
    1. 7.   Grounds for prayer/relief sought for:-
    2. 1.     CIC decisions on notified organizations under Schedule II of

     RTI Act 2005 like DRDO

(i)       CIC in its various decisions consistently held that Establishment Matters relating to the organization notified u/s 24 of the RTI Act come within the purview of the Act and information in this regard thereto are not exempted from disclosure.

(ii)      CIC in its various decisions clarified that the exemption u/s 24(1) for DRDO (notified organisation under Schedule II) is only for Scientific/Technical/Strategic/national security information and not for the information of General nature/Estt. Matters/ Routine Correspondence/ all other information for which exemptions u/s 24(1) are not allowed.

(iii)     These decisions of CIC are binding on all notified organisation under Schedule II, as these decisions of CIC has not been challenged till date in any court.

(iv)     Information sought in RTI Application dated 03 August 2013 was pertaining to Establishment Matter

(v)      In this regard following decisions of CIC are listed for your kind information and consideration.

  1. CIC/LS/A/2012/002612 dated 22.03.2013 (Dr. Neelam Bhalla Vs DRDO)
  2. CIC/LS/A/2009/001073 dated 17.2.2010 (Navin Praksh Gupta Vs DRDO)
  3. CIC/LS/A/2012/002487 dated 31.12.2012 ( Ms. Savitha Vs DRDO)
  4. CIC/LS/A/2010/000107 dated 26.4.2010 (Ms. K. Surya Kumari Vs DRDO)
  5. CIC/SM/C/2008/00054/LS dated 29.01.2010 (Shri Prabhat Vs DRDO)
  6. CIC/LS/A/2010/001277 dated 2.3.2010 (Ram Manohar Singh Vs. DRDO)
  7. CIC/LS/A/2012/002599 & CIC/LS/A/2012/002146 dated 01.11.2012 (Virender Kumar Vs DRDO)
  8. CIC/LS/C/2012/001204 dated 9.8.2012 (Rajiv Chauhan Vs DRDO)
  9. CIC/SM/A/2009/001014/LS dated 09.11.2009 (Navin Prakash Gupta Vs DRDO)
  10. CIC/LS/A/2009/001073 dated 17 Feb 2010 (Navin Prakash Gupta Vs DRDO)
  11. CIC/SM/C/2009/00794, CIC/LS/A/2010/00015, CIC/LS/C/2010/000076 dated 18 June 2010 (Navin Prakash Gupta Vs DRDO)

(vi)     In these decisions CIC decided that “Immunity granted u/s 24(1) is only for scientific & strategic Information only. All other information should be provided by all organisation notified under second schedule of the Act“.

2.     Nature of information sought is not  related to strategic/national security/scientific /technical matters

Information sought is related to “Parking”. This type of information has already been allowed by CIC as information sought is not pertaining to strategic/national security/scientific/technical matters.

3.     Information sought is related to Estt. Matter/General Routine nature is permissible & allowed by CIC, even after the fact “DRDO is notified organisation under Schedule II”, in various decisions against DRDO.

4.     Information sought is also related to allegations of Corruption as already mentioned in RTI application dated 04 October 2013. Information sought is having angle of vigilance as per CVC Act. Under the provisions of Section 24(1) of the Act, the information should be pertaining to allegations of Corruption only. No evidences or proofs of corruption are required for seeking information related to corruption as per RTI Act 2005. Instead the onus is on CPIO to establish that information sought is not having vigilance angle and pertaining to allegation of corruption. In case the prima facie evidences of Corruption are available the appellant will approach to CVC/CBI not file RTI to get information pertaining to allegations of Corruption?

                  i.        It is alleged that Dr. AK Saxena, Director, DMSRDE misused his powers to construct/erect the parking shade near CSD Canteen. It has been accepted by Director, DMSRDE vide Minute Sheet No.  AE/Gen Admin/13/0578 dated 26 September 2013 issued by Dr. D.N. Tripathi, Addl. Director (Admin).  Vide this order “all officers & employees of DMSRDE were ordered to park their vehicles in parking area/shades near CSD Canteen with effect from 01 October 2013”. Again Chief Security Officer issued ION dated 03.10.2013 on behalf of Director regarding Car-Parking near Admin. Building. Again an ION was issued by Dr. DN Tripathi, Addl. Director(Admin) regarding parking area near CSD Canteen.

                ii.        This parking shade/vehicle stand was not constructed by MES or CCE (R&D) North. It was constructed by Director, DMSRDE using private contractor of his favor M/s Gupta Constructions, Gandhi Gram, Kanpur. Thereby CPIO provided false information vides his letter dated 29 October 2013.

              iii.        MES(Military Engineering Services) and CCE(R&D) are the only agencies authorize for any construction of buildings , to execute minor & major work in buildings, construction /erect of shades/parking area etc. in Technical & Residential area of DMSRDE.

               iv.        The source of fund used to erect two shades was from one project fund and not from build-up fund. Project fund cannot be used for construction work. Hence Dr. AK Saxena, Director misused his powers to illegal and unauthorized construction of two parking shades near CSD Canteen inside the Technical Area of DMSRDE, to give undue advantage to M/s Gupta Construction, Gandhi Gram, Kanpur with vested interest.

                 v.        All supply orders for purchase of material used to erect the parking shades were issued to M/s Gupta Constructions who is neighbor to Dr. AK Saxena residence at Gandhi Gram, Kanpur.

               vi.        Misuse of powers for personal gains, unauthorized construction and misuse of funds is clear case of Corruption. Documents are available in records with DMSRDE which can be verified by FAA.

             vii.        It is quite evident from Minute Sheet No. AE/Gen Admin/13/0578 dated 26 September 2013 that there exists building of CSD Canteen in DMSRDE near newly constructed parking area/shade.

            viii.        The nomenclature of building in which CSD canteen is running is CHEM STORE, as per MES record. Director, DMSRDE is using this building in unauthorized manner to run CSD Canteen in this building. CSD Canteen is a profitable URC under CSD hence it should pay rent as well as electrical charges to MES. In this connection MES also issued notice to CSD Canteen for payment of electrical charges and recently cut down the power of CSD  for fifteen days, thereby CSD was closed for about fifteen days.

               ix.        Information sought is related to “Parking”. This information is not related to any scientific/technical/strategic matter. Therefore information related to contract, supply order, purchase, construction and manufacturing etc. is disclosable under RTI Act, CIC decisions mentioned above and even by FAA, DRDO.

8.   Declaration:-

I hereby state that the information and particulars given above are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal
21- Sunderwala, Raipur
Dehradun-248008
Uttarakhand

Appeal No.:FA/PDD/DMSRDE/2013/Parking

Date: 08 November, 2013                                          

 Enclosure: Two 

(1)  Letter from CPIO, DMSRDE dated 29 October 2013.

(2)  RTI Application dated 04 October 2013.

 

Drdo

RTI – CSD – DMSRDE

Leave a comment
To,
Shri Sarvesh Kumar
Central Public Information Officer
DMSRDE, GT Road
Kanpur-208013                    

Subject: Application under Right to Information Act 2005

Sir,

Kindly refer to following decisions of Central Information Commission and verdict given in these decisions.

  1. File No. CIC/LS/A/2012/002612 dated 22.3.2013 (Dr. Neelam Bhalla vs. DRDO) Verdict – “It is, no doubt, true that DRDO is an exempted organisation; yet it has been the consistent view of this Commission that the benefit of exemption extends only to functional / operational matters and not to establishment related routine matters. The legality of this view has not been challenged in the relevant judicial forum so far”.
  2. CIC/LS/A/2010/000107 dated 26.4.2010 (Ms. K. Surya Kumari Vs DRDO)
  3. CIC/SM/C/2008/00054/LS dated 29.01.2010 (Ms. K. Surya Kumari Vs DRDO)
  4. CIC/LS/A/2012/002487 dated 31.12.2012 ( Ms. Savitha Vs DRDO)

In its various decisions CIC consistently held that Establishment Matters relating to the organization notified u/s 24 of the RTI Act come within the purview of the Act and information in this regard thereto are not exempted from disclosure.

In light of the above decisions of CIC, Kindly provide the following information under RTI Act 2005. 

BRIEF FACTS FOR APPLICATION UNDER RTI ACT 2005

With reference to your Minute Sheet No. AE/Gen Admin/13/0578 dated 26 September 2013 and modified Minute Sheet No. AE/Gen Admin/13/0578 dated 04 October 2013, signed by Dr. D.N. Tripathi, Addl Director (Admin.) on behalf of Director.

  1. It has been ordered by these Minute Sheets that “wef 01.10.2013 all officers and employees are informed to park their vehicles in the Parking Area constructed near CSD Canteen” and “above Minute Sheet is related to the officers/employees who goes to CSD Canteen for purchasing items by their vehicles”.
  2. Facts narrated above in points (1) and (2) establish that CSD Canteen building exists in DMSRDE and CSD facility is available in DMSRDE

In light of above facts kindly provide following information u/s 6(1) of RTI Act 2005.

INFORMATION SOUGHT

  1. Provide the details of officers and staff with name & rank that are attached and involved in management and operation of DMSRDE CSD Canteen right from Chairman, Officer-In- Charge, Technical Officers and Staff at present.dmsrde csd table1
  2.  Total monthly expenditure incurred on incentives/emoluments to official working part time in DMSRDE CSD Canteen for month July 2013.
  3. Provide the amount of miscellaneous expenditure incurred in July 2013 under following heads in DMSRDE CSD Canteen.
  4. dmsrde csd table2Balance sheet of DMSRDE CSD Canteen for the month July 2013.
  5. Provide details of funds available with DMSRDE CSD Canteen in its Current A/C at SBI DMSRDE Branch Kanpur and all Fixed Deposits pledged with this Current account at SBI DMSRDE Branch.
  6. The competent authority responsible for attachment of officials at CSD Canteen.
  7. Whether rotation of officials working in CSD Canteen took place vide CVC Circular No.03/09/13 letter No.004/VGL/090/225753 dated 11.9.2013. (Yes/No).
  8. If answer to point (7) is yes then provide the maximum period for which an official could remain attached with CSD Canteen?
  9. Mr. DP Shukla, Lab. Attd. (Now Technical Officer) is attached/posted in DMSRDE CSD Canteen since long time. Provide his attachment/posting detail in DMSRDE CSD Canteen from 01.01.2000 to 30 September 2013.
  10. DMSRDE CSD Canteen is a profitable unit which earning good amount of money by getting commission/profit in sale of store items at canteen. In which account this money is being deposited and the name of officers who are authorize/responsible to withdraw the money.
  11. Provide type /nature of purpose for which the fund of CSD can be utilized.
  12. Can CSD fund be utilized for purchase of item/store/services that are not used by CSD Canteen instead used by DMSRDE officials like furniture, construction of aluminum, partitions, distribution of gifts etc.?
  13. Provide sales statement of DMSRDE Canteen for month of July 2013.
  14. Cheque No. 871271 dated 22.7.2013 issued by DMSRDE Canteen. Provide information in following format.
  15. dmsrde csd table3Cheque No. 871267 with payable amount of Rs. 214312.00 was issued by DMSRDE Canteen (CSD) in July 2013. Provide following information in this regard-
    1. Name of the firm/vendor in favor of which cheque No. 871267 with payable amount of Rs. 214312.00 was issued.
    2. Purpose of issue of the cheque No. 871267 of DMSRDE Canteen (CSD) with amount of Rs. 214312.00 in July 2013.
    3. List of items purchased through cheque No. 871267 issue by DMSRDE Canteen (CSD) for amount Rs. 214312.00 in July 2013.
    4. User of the items purchased vide cheque No. 871267 issued for Rs. 214312/-.
    5. The items purchased vide cheque No. 871267 has been kept in which place.
    6. Copy of bill of vendor/firm for supply of items against cheque No. 871267 issued by DMSRDE Canteen (CSD) with amount of Rs. 214312.00 in July 2013.
  16. Whether any fund was withdrawn from account of DMSRDE Canteen for purpose of aluminum door and grill partition in Security Division Building at reception counter.(Yes/No)
  17. If answer to point (16) is yes then provide the expenditure details for the said work at reception of Security Office.
  18. If answer to point(16) is No, then provide the following details
    1. The agency (DMSRDE/MES) which issue supply order to accomplish the task for aluminum partition at reception of Security Office.
    2. The name of vendor who make aluminum partition at reception of Security Office.
    3. The copy of supply order issued for making the aluminum partition at reception of Security Office.
    4. Total expenditure involved in construction of aluminum partition at reception of Security Office.
  19. Provide copy of statement of expenditure for Rs. 255248.00 from 01.07.2013 to 31.07.2013 under Miscellaneous Head for month of July 2013 in DMSRDE Canteen (CSD).
  20. Whether audit of CSD Canteen accounts took place by Local Audit Officer (LAO)/ACDA on annual basis. Yes/No
  21. If answer to point 20 is yes then provide the copy of audit report of DMSRDE CSD Canteen for FY 2012-2013.
  22. Percentage of average profit in sale of items/store at DMSRDE CSD Canteen.
  23. Average profit of DMSRDE CSD Canteen in rupees  per month in FY 2012-13.
  24. How much funds/money has been expenditure in welfare activities from CSD fund in FY 2012-2013?

The information sought in this RTI Application is on Establishment Matter and as such not exempted u/s 24 of the RTI Act.

Besides Information sought is pertaining to allegations of Corruption and as such not exempted u/s 24 of the RTI Act 2005.

An IPO of Rs. 10/- as application fee (IPO No. 17F 549286) is annexed as Annexure-1.

 (Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal)
21-Sunderwala, Raipur
Dehradun-248008
Uttarakhand           
prabhudoon@gmail.com, www.corruptionindrdo.com        

Annexure:-

  1. IPO of Rs. 10/- , with IPO No.  17F 549286  as application Fee.
Drdo

Foundation Laid for Recruitment Scam in DRDO

4 Comments
To,                                                                                                                  26rd  October 2013
Sh Avinash Chandra
DG (R&D),DRDO,SA to RM, Secretary DRDO
DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg
New Delhi -110105
 

Subject: Foundation Laid for Recruitment Scam in DRDO

CEPTAM was constituted with aim and objective to recruit the technical/ scientific/ admin allied man power, who can be the workforce in major national DRDO projects.

DRDO Hqrs made it a mockery and laughing object. DRDO has violated SRO from beginning of CEPTAM and there are several cases pending in CAT/High courts all across the India.

The recent recruitment drive tells a different story.

CEPTAM – 06 Advertisement Published in Employment News dated 04-10th May, 2013.

No of post advertised in various categories – 844

Approximately 5 lakhs application received (excluding hundreds of applications misplaced)

Approximately 1 lakh applications were rejected for silly reasons (example followed)

Approximately 2 lakhs candidates not able to appear for examination held on 25th August 2013

Approximately 3 lakhs candidates deprived by Sh Rajesh Goyal, Director, CEPTAM

It is very big question, how DRDO can give permission to Sh Rajesh Goyal, Director, CEPTAM to play with fundamental right of young citizen of India.

Please go through the following facts which clearly shows Sh Rajesh Goyal’s, Director, CEPTAM personal vested interest

  1. The SMS game – All interested candidates who wish to apply for DRDO Entry Test, are compulsorily required to register themselves on mobile no. 56677 of CEPTAM by sending a SMS in this format CEPTAM First choice of Exam City Code Post Code Date of Birth as ddmmyy NAME (Leaving a space between first, middle and last name) Example: CEPTAM 15 0112 231283 Rupesh Kumar Goyal (Name of Director’s son, it is example of pure chamchagiri environment of CEPTAM). Why this SMS system introduced by Sh Rajesh Goyal, Director, CEPTAM

Approximately 5 Lakhs application received and each applicant paid Rs 3 for each SMS registration.

Total money received by CEPTAM 15 Lakhs

The contract was cooked with M/s MILLENNIUM SYSTEMS  a computer peripheral supplier and well connected with Sh Rajesh Goyal since he was in ISSA. Anyone can verify these things with back record of firms supply orders vs with Sh Rajesh Goyal’s involvements. The M/s MILLENNIUM SYSTEMS website http://milsys.co.in is shown the order of client list. If 5 lakhs applicants registered the money was huge 15 Lakhs and in open market bulk SMS service providers 6 to 7 paisa /SMS so any one can work out the play in this contract. The CEPTAM  did not give this contract through DAVP shows the corruption angle.

  • No approval from competent authority to induct compulsory Mobile registration.
  • No tender floated by CEPTAM for bulk SMS service providing
    • No minimum 7 vendors address procurement policy of DRDO followed (Limited tender)
  • CEPTAM was not approached to DAVP empanelled SMS bulk service provider

M/s MILLENNIUM SYSTEMS – Provides -Selling of Computers & Related Peripherals such as :Range of Desktops / Servers – IBM / HP / COMPAQ / ACER etc.Range of POS and Kiosk / Billing Machines – Panasonic / Epson,Multimedia Products e.g. Video & Audio Processing Cards, Website designing and hosting. Man power Solutions / Recruitment Solutions /Data Entry. Annual maintenance contracts (AMC)

CEPTAM Website FAQ

Q-6.     Is it necessary to send application after registering through SMS?

A-6.     YES. Without registration number application will not be accepted. It is FIRST STEP for Applying for any post. (Note: Register for each post code separately if you are applying for more than one post code and get registration for each post code.)

Q-9.     I have submitted my application on prescribed format but could not register myself through SMS. Whether my application will be considered?

A-9.  NO; Applications received without registration number are liable to be rejected. Prior registration is mandatory for all posts, candidates applying for.

Application form the marked box for office use only
Application form the marked box for office use only

 

In above application form the marked box for office use only so hundreds of candidates not filled the SMS registration, result in this basis CEPTAM rejected their applications, who is responsible. Is DRDO ready to repay the money/time wasted by individuals?

Question is whether this kind of provision for like diesel mechanic posts and for SC/ST candidates who belong to rural areas and do not have access or are familiar with internet to verify or clear their issues, is allowed by government of India?

Example rejection of application due to SMS Registration

Example rejection of application due to SMS Registration
Example rejection of application due to SMS Registration

 

2.      The CEPTAM asked applications by ordinary post and other option were put in 2 boxes in both gates of Metcalf House and 1 box in front of CEPTAM entrance. There was no mechanism to acknowledge applications. So what happened to hundreds of hundreds candidates who spent their days in front of CEPTAM reception but could not get their admit cards because simply they were told that their application was not found. If so then CEPTAM should show their accounts about how many postal orders they enchased against each application. The total number of available applications & postal orders will never match. There is no other example in entire government of India or PSU, Banks where application acknowledgement mechanism is not applied. CEPTAM violated fundamental right of young citizens of India.

Example  application – not received /found

Example application – not received /found
Example application – not received /found

Example  application – not received /found

Example application – not received /found
Example application – not received /found

3.   Approximately 2 lakhs candidates could not appear due to wrongly assigned examination centres. It is not possible that the huge number of candidates themselves asked for the centre, this whole thing is deliberately done by CEPTAM on the direction of Sh Rajesh Goyal or otherwise it is clearly proved that he is incompetent to handle such a task. Please find some examples of admit cards issued by CEPTAM.

post5    In Application centre city code clearly mentioned – 09 (Delhi NCR)

Admit Card centre city code given – Ranchi (Code -24)
Admit Card centre city code given – Ranchi (Code -24)

Admit Card centre city code given – Ranchi (Code -24)

In Application centre city code asked – 09 (Delhi NCR) Given Kanpur (Code 16)
In Application centre city code asked – 09 (Delhi NCR) Given Kanpur (Code 16)

In Application centre city code asked – 09 (Delhi NCR) Given Kanpur (Code 16)

In Application centre city code asked – 09 (Delhi NCR) Given Ahmedabad (Code 02)
In Application centre city code asked – 09 (Delhi NCR) Given Ahmedabad (Code 02)

In Application centre city code asked – 09 (Delhi NCR) Given Ahmedabad (Code 02)

Wrong date of birth, wrong post code entered by data entry firms
Wrong date of birth, wrong post code entered by data entry firms

In Application centre city code asked – 09 (Delhi NCR) Given Ahmedabad (Code 02)4.

4.       Although CEPTAM corrected some centre errors and provided that list on the website but numbers (First list -89, http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/ceptam/CityChangeList.pdf second list 54 http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/ceptam/CityAndPCDlist.pdf) were few in respect to the numbers of candidates who were not able to appear i.e. 2 Lakhs.

5.         There are many example in which any one can see, how Sh Rajesh Goyal, Director chose data entry firms who played with the future of young India.

Examples

post10

Photo placed wrongly by data entry firm and Centre wrong
Photo placed wrongly by data entry firm and Centre wrong
Photo Lalita and name in admit card Rajnish Kumar
Photo Lalita and name in admit card Rajnish Kumar

6.       In one of my RTIs, I have requested information regarding selection boards’ expert members, because it is observed that Sh Rajesh Goyal, Director, CEPTAM engaged his wife, his co-brother and other blood relation persons as expert in different selection boards all over India. Like Dr Madhu (Madhuri) Goyal , Mr M C Goyal,  Mr Sekher Gupta,  Mr Anupam Gupta . The act of Sh Rajesh Goyal, Director, CEPTAM assigning his relatives as experts violated the laid down rules CCS rules. No prior approval from competent authority was taken in this regards. This act can give liberty to do manipulation in recruitment. My RTI dated 2nd May 2013 and CPIO, CEPTAM Reply is enclosed here with for your ready reference. (Assessment Boards and Recruitment Board constituted in the year 2012) This mechanism is also following in recent recruitment drive. (RTI request and reply of CPIO, CEPTAM enclosed herewith for your ready reference.)

7.        Please find enclosed list of the name and phone numbers of some candidates from whom you can visualize how CEPTAM, DRDO played with the future of young Indians for their own vested interest. (List enclosed as annexure)

Sir, above all examples are enough evidences to investigate the CEPTAM-06 recruitment drive, beside this lot of complaint already received by honorable Defence Minister and various authorities. The CEPTAM director putting his efforts to diluting and burring the subject matter. It is requested kindly do needful urgently for the future of young citizens of India.

Sir, please put your all sincere efforts to stop the corruption in CEPTAM. The approximately 3 lakhs youths are waiting for your honest decision to get fair chance of selection. Do something to maintain prestige of DRDO.

Regards

 Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal
21-Sunderwala, Raipur
Dehradun-248008
Uttarakhand
Cell No- 9411114879, Landline- 0135-2787750
e-mail- prabhudoon@gmail.com, website – www.corruptionindrdo.com

 

Enclosed

  1. Copy of my RTI request to CPIO,CEPTAM dated 2nd May 2013
  2. Copy my RTI request to CEPTAM dated 9th June 2013
  3. List of the name and phone numbers of some candidates

 

 

 

Drdo

Foundation Laid for Recruitment Scam in DRDO

3 Comments
To,                                                                                                                  23rd  October 2013
Shri. Sameer Kumar Khare,
Joint Secretary (Estt.) and Public Grievances & CVO,
Ministry of Defence, Government of India, 97, South Block,
New Delhi -110 105.

Subject: Foundation Laid for Recruitment Scam in DRDO

CEPTAM was constituted with aim and objective to recruit the technical/ scientific/ admin allied man power, who can be the workforce in major national DRDO projects.

DRDO Hqrs made it a mockery and laughing object. DRDO has violated SRO from beginning of CEPTAM and there are several cases pending in CAT/High courts all across the India.

The recent recruitment drive tells a different story.

CEPTAM – 06 Advertisement Published in Employment News dated 04-10th May, 2013.

No of post advertised in various categories – 844

Approximately 5 lakhs application received (excluding hundreds of applications misplaced)

Approximately 1 lakh applications were rejected for silly reasons (example followed)

Approximately 2 lakhs candidates not able to appear for examination held on 25th August 2013

Approximately 3 lakhs candidates deprived by Sh Rajesh Goyal, Director, CEPTAM

It is very big question, how DRDO can give permission to Sh Rajesh Goyal, Director, CEPTAM to play with fundamental right of young citizen of India.

Please go through the following facts which clearly shows Sh Rajesh Goyal’s, Director, CEPTAM personal vested interest

  1. The SMS game – All interested candidates who wish to apply for DRDO Entry Test, are compulsorily required to register themselves on mobile no. 56677 of CEPTAM by sending a SMS in this format CEPTAM First choice of Exam City Code Post Code Date of Birth as ddmmyy NAME (Leaving a space between first, middle and last name) Example: CEPTAM 15 0112 231283 Rupesh Kumar Goyal (Name of Director’s son, it is example of pure chamchagiri environment of CEPTAM). Why this SMS system introduced by Sh Rajesh Goyal, Director, CEPTAM

Approximately 5 Lakhs application received and each applicant paid Rs 3 for each SMS registration.

Total money received by CEPTAM 15 Lakhs

The contract was cooked with M/s MILLENNIUM SYSTEMS  a computer peripheral supplier and well connected with Sh Rajesh Goyal since he was in ISSA. Anyone can verify these things with back record of firms supply orders vs with Sh Rajesh Goyal’s involvements. The M/s MILLENNIUM SYSTEMS website http://milsys.co.in is shown the order of client list. If 5 lakhs applicants registered the money was huge 15 Lakhs and in open market bulk SMS service providers 6 to 7 paisa /SMS so any one can work out the play in this contract. The CEPTAM  did not give this contract through DAVP shows the corruption angle.

  • No approval from competent authority to induct compulsory Mobile registration.
  • No tender floated by CEPTAM for bulk SMS service providing
    • No minimum 7 vendors address procurement policy of DRDO followed (Limited tender)
  • CEPTAM was not approached to DAVP empanelled SMS bulk service provider

M/s MILLENNIUM SYSTEMS – Provides -Selling of Computers & Related Peripherals such as :Range of Desktops / Servers – IBM / HP / COMPAQ / ACER etc.Range of POS and Kiosk / Billing Machines – Panasonic / Epson,Multimedia Products e.g. Video & Audio Processing Cards, Website designing and hosting. Man power Solutions / Recruitment Solutions /Data Entry. Annual maintenance contracts (AMC)

CEPTAM Website FAQ

Q-6.     Is it necessary to send application after registering through SMS?

A-6.     YES. Without registration number application will not be accepted. It is FIRST STEP for Applying for any post. (Note: Register for each post code separately if you are applying for more than one post code and get registration for each post code.)

Q-9.     I have submitted my application on prescribed format but could not register myself through SMS. Whether my application will be considered?

A-9.  NO; Applications received without registration number are liable to be rejected. Prior registration is mandatory for all posts, candidates applying for.

Application form the marked box for office use only
Application form the marked box for office use only

2.    In above application form the marked box for office use only so hundreds of candidates not filled the SMS registration, result in this basis CEPTAM rejected their applications, who is responsible. Is DRDO ready to repay the money/time wasted by individuals?

Question is whether this kind of provision for like diesel mechanic posts and for SC/ST candidates who belong to rural areas and do not have access or are familiar with internet to verify or clear their issues, is allowed by government of India?

Example rejection of application due to SMS Registration

Example rejection of application due to SMS Registration
Example rejection of application due to SMS Registration

3.    The CEPTAM asked applications by ordinary post and other option were put in 2 boxes in both gates of Metcalf House and 1 box in front of CEPTAM entrance. There was no mechanism to acknowledge applications. So what happened to hundreds of hundreds candidates who spent their days in front of CEPTAM reception but could not get their admit cards because simply they were told that their application was not found. If so then CEPTAM should show their accounts about how many postal orders they enchased against each application. The total number of available applications & postal orders will never match. There is no other example in entire government of India or PSU, Banks where application acknowledgement mechanism is not applied. CEPTAM violated fundamental right of young citizens of  India.

Example  application – not received /found

Example application – not received /found
Example application – not received /found
Example application – not received /found
Example application – not received /found

4.   Approximately 2 lakhs candidates could not appear due to wrongly assigned examination centers. It is not possible that the huge number of candidates themselves asked for the centre, this whole thing is deliberately done by CEPTAM on the direction of Sh Rajesh Goyal or otherwise it is clearly proved that he is incompetent to handle such a task. Please find some examples of admit cards issued by CEPTAM.

post5
In Application centre city code clearly mentioned – 09 (Delhi NCR)
Admit Card centre city code given – Ranchi (Code -24)
Admit Card centre city code given – Ranchi (Code -24)
In Application centre city code asked – 09 (Delhi NCR) Given Kanpur (Code 16)
In Application centre city code asked – 09 (Delhi NCR) Given Kanpur (Code 16)
In Application centre city code asked – 09 (Delhi NCR) Given Ahmedabad (Code 02)
In Application centre city code asked – 09 (Delhi NCR) Given Ahmedabad (Code 02)

5.    Although CEPTAM corrected some centre errors and provided that list on the website but numbers (First list -89, http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/ceptam/CityChangeList.pdf second list 54 http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/ceptam/CityAndPCDlist.pdf) were few in respect to the numbers of candidates who were not able to appear i.e. 2 Lakhs.

6.     There are many example in which any one can see, how Sh Rajesh Goyal, Director chose data entry firms who played with the future of young India.

Examples

Wrong date of birth, wrong post code entered by data entry firms
Wrong date of birth, wrong post code entered by data entry firms
Wrong date of birth, wrong post code entered by data entry firms
Wrong date of birth, wrong post code entered by data entry firms
Photo placed wrongly by data entry firm and Centre wrong
Photo placed wrongly by data entry firm and Centre wrong
Photo Lalita and name in admit card Rajnish Kumar
Photo Lalita and name in admit card Rajnish Kumar

7.      In one of my RTIs, I have requested information regarding selection boards’ expert members, because it is observed that Sh Rajesh Goyal, Director, CEPTAM engaged his wife, his co-brother and other blood relation persons as expert in different selection boards all over India. Like Dr Madhu (Madhuri) Goyal , Mr M C Goyal,  Mr Sekher Gupta,  Mr Anupam Gupta . The act of Sh Rajesh Goyal, Director, CEPTAM assigning his relatives as experts violated the laid down rules CCS rules. No prior approval from competent authority was taken in this regards. This act can give liberty to do manipulation in recruitment. My RTI dated 2nd May 2013 and CPIO, CEPTAM Reply is enclosed here with for your ready reference. (Assessment Boards and Recruitment Board constituted in the year 2012) This mechanism is also following in recent recruitment drive. (RTI request and reply of CPIO, CEPTAM enclosed herewith for your ready reference.)

8.     Please find enclosed list of the name and phone numbers of some candidates from whom you can visualize how CEPTAM, DRDO played with the future of young Indians for their own vested interest. (List enclosed as annexure)

Sir, above all examples are enough evidences to investigate the CEPTAM-06 recruitment drive, beside this lot of complaint already received by honorable Defence Minister and various authorities. The CEPTAM director putting his efforts to diluting and burring the subject matter. It is requested kindly do needful urgently for the future of young citizens of India.

Regards

 Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal
21-Sunderwala, Raipur
Dehradun-248008
Uttarakhand
Cell No- 9411114879, Landline- 0135-2787750
e-mail- prabhudoon@gmail.com, website – www.corruptionindrdo.com

Enclosed

  1. Copy of my RTI request to CPIO,CEPTAM dated 2nd May 2013
  2. Copy my RTI request to CEPTAM dated 9th June 2013
  3. List of the name and phone numbers of some candidates

 

 

Drdo

RTI – DRDO Hqrs – Regarding reappointment of Sh A .K Musla, Ex-Scientist ‘G

1 Comment
To                                                                                                           23rd  October 2013
CPIO, DRDO HQ
Room No. 314A
DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg
New Delhi – 110105

Hello,
Recently after superannuation  Sh A .K Musla, Scientist ‘G’, IRDE, DRDO, Dehradun joined Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL), Kotdwara

As per government of India Office Memorandum No 27012/52000-Estt (A) Dated 5thDecember 2006.

Procedure for grant of permission to the pensioners for commercial employment after retirement.

And this practice is very well being followed by DRDO, Please refer

Your letter no DVS/01/0326/M/04 dated 16th March 2011 – Lt Gen Dilip Bhardwaj
Your letter no DOP/04/47009/M/01 dated 5th Oct 2011 – Lt Gen R K Karwal
Your letter no DOP/04/40078/P/01 dated 23rd Feb 2012  

Office Memorandum No 27012/52000-Estt(A) Dated 5th December 2006.

Para (a) Permission will be required for post-retirement commercial employment of a retired officer who was a member of a Group ‘A’ Central Civil Service or held a Group ‘A’ post if the commercial employment is to be taken up within one year of retirement.

Para d) Before an application of the retired officer is considered, an undertaking from the retired officer is to be taken in the form of an affidavit that the factors mentioned in clauses (b) to (f) of the amended sub-rule (3)of Rule 10 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, do not come in the way of considering his application.

As per “The Gazette of India” Extraordinary No 568 dated 23rd November 2006 Part – II, Section-3, Sub section  (i)    

Para 3 (a) Whether a” No Objection” for the proposed post retirement commercial employment has   been obtained from the cadre controlling authority and from the office where the officer  retired.

              (c) Whether there is conflict of interest between the policies of the office he has held in the last three years and the interest represented of work undertaken by the organization he proposed to join.

(e) Whether service record of the officer is clear, particularly with respect of integrity and dealings with non- Government Organizations.

With reference to above kindly provide me the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005.

  1. Copy of permission letter of  Sh A .K Musla, Ex-Scientist ‘G’, IRDE, DRDO, Dehradun, DRDO before joining  Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL), Kotdwara
  2. Copy of ” No Objection” for the proposed post retirement commercial employment    has   been obtained  by Sh A .K Musla, Ex- Scientist ‘G’, IRDE, DRDO, Dehradun, DRDO from the cadre controlling authority and from the office where the officer  retired.
  3. Copy of vigilance clearance from the competent authority.

Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL) for the furtherance of business BEL, Kotdwara establishing an office/centre in the office complex of IRDE.

i.     Please provide terms & condition commercial
ii.    Payment condition for using office premises by BEL
iii.   As per government laid down rule MES permission and MES involvement is necessary, please provide the correspondence or MES approval of using   office premises from MES by Director, IRDE.
iv.    IB clearance for BEL officials using office premises has been taken by Director, IRDE yes/No

Note –above required information is directly related to corruption and not come under schedule -II

“Whoever does anything with the intention of causing wrongful gain to one person or wrongful loss to another is said to do that thing dishonesty” 

Enclosed – Rs 10 Postal Order -17F 549288

Regards

Prabhu Dandriyal                                                                                                                            
 21-Sunderwal, Raipur, Dehradun -248008                                                                                                                              0135-2787750 – 91-9411114879                                                                  prabhudoon@gmail.com, www.corruptionindrdo.com
Drdo

Private cars with registration No. UP78 BS 1144 and UP78 CP 6510 using DMSRDE for commercial purpose

3 Comments
To,
Shri Sarvesh Kumar
Central Public Information Officer
DMSRDE, GT Road
Kanpur-208013             

Subject: Application under Right to Information Act 2005

Hello,

Kindly refer to following decisions of Central Information Commission and verdict given thereof in these decisions.

  1. File No. CIC/LS/A/2012/002612 dated 22.3.2013 (Dr. Neelam Bhalla vs. DRDO) Verdict – “It is, no doubt, true that DRDO is an exempted organisation; yet it has been the consistent view of this Commission that the benefit of exemption extends only to functional / operational matters and not to establishment related routine matters. The legality of this view has not been challenged in the relevant judicial forum so far”.
  2. CIC/LS/A/2010/000107 dated 26.4.2010 (Ms. K. Surya Kumari Vs DRDO)
  3. CIC/SM/C/2008/00054/LS dated 29.01.2010 (Shri Prabhat Vs DRDO)
  4. CIC/LS/A/2012/002487 dated 31.12.2012 ( Ms. Savitha Vs DRDO)

CIC in its above mentioned decisions consistently held that Establishment Matters relating to the organization notified u/s 24 of the RTI Act come within the purview of the Act and information in this regard thereto are not exempted from disclosure.

In light of the above decisions of CIC, Kindly provide the following information under RTI Act 2005.

INFORMATION SOUGHT

  1. Total No.  of transport/vehicles available in MT Division DMSRDE.
  2. Provide following information in respect of all vehicles available in DMSRDE.
  • Type of vehicle, Brand name, Manufacturer
  • Date of Purchase, purchase cost and source of fund(Build up/Project etc)
  • Present depreciated cost as on 31.10.2013
  • Average distance run /traveled by each vehicle in the year 2012-2013 separately for
  • each vehicle.
  • Total expenditure on maintenance of each vehicle separately in the year 2011-2012 and 2012-2013.

3.      How many CMTD /MTD are posted in MT Division?
4.      Mode of tendering for selection of vendors for hired vehicles (Local Board/Single            Tender/Limited Tender/Open Tender/Repeat Order) for the following years.

  • 2010-2011
  • 2011-2012
  • 2012-2013
  • 2013-2014

5.     Total budget of MT Division years 2010-2011, 2011-2012 and 2012-13.
6.     Total expenditure and payment made for hired vehicles/transport for the years 2010-2011, 2011-2012 and 2012-13 along with name of vendor to whom the payment made.
7.      Provide expenditure incurred on various heads for the years 2010-2011, 2011-2012 and 2012-13.
8.      Provide information about vendor/firm which got contract for hired vehicles and amount paid to these vendors  in following formatrtimtpost1

 9.      Amount of Service Tax  that has been paid by DMSRDE to Vendor as reflected in bills submitted by vendor for depositing in Custom, Excise & Service Tax Department in following formatrtimtpost2

  1. Provide copies of CST (Comparative Statement) after opening of quotations duly approved by competent authority for the years 2011-2012, 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 for giving contract to vendors for hired vehicles services in DMSRDE.
  2. Provide copy of supply order placed for hiring private vehicles/transport for the FY 2011-2012, 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 in DMSRDE.
  3. Copy of contract with terms & condition and rate (usage charges) for the year 2012-2013 and 2013-2014.
  4. Whether any extension of contract for hired vehicle has been given to any vendor for during the years 2012-2013 and 2013-2014. (Yes/No)
  5. If answer to point (13) is yes then provide copy of rules under PM 2006 by which extension for contract of hired vehicle services (Repeat Order) could be given to vendor without going in fresh bidding.
  6. Details about maintenance of vehicles/transport available in DMSRDE for each vehicle/transport in following formatrtimtpost3
  1.  Status of vehicle (operational/Non operational) available in DMSRDE when services of hired vehicles were utilized.
  2. Whether hired vehicles provided by vendor Super India Travels, Rama Devi, Kanpur with following registration number are registered at RTO, Kanpur under category of Taxi for commercial purposes. Registration & Details of vehicles are

(a)   UP78 BS 1144 ( Indica Car White Color with white number plate)

(b)   UP78 CP 6510 (Indigo CS White Car with white number plate)

  1. If answer to point (17) is Yes then provide copy of registration certificate issued by RTO Kanpur for said vehicles under Taxi for Commercial purpose.
  2. If answer to point (17) is No then provide the grounds on which vendor not having proper registration under Taxi from RTO, Kanpur was allowed to provide services in DMSDRE.
  3. The details of Vendor Registration Committee at DMSRDE with name & designation of Chairman and members.

The color of the number plates used in cars with registration No. UP78 BS 1144 and UP78 CP 6510 provided by vendor for hired services are not Yellow. The color of these no. plates are White. It establishes that cars used for hired transport in DMSRDE are not registered under TAXI FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSE. Also the said vendor is not registered at Custom & Excise Department under Service Tax category and not depositing any Service Tax for hired vehicles services at DMSRDE.

Therefore the Information Sought is pertaining to Allegations of Corruption and as such not exempted u/s 24 of the RTI Act 2005.

The information sought in this RTI Application is on Establishment Matter and as such not exempted u/s 24 of the RTI Act.

An IPO of Rs. 10/- as application fee (IPO No. 17F 549289) is annexed as Annexure-1.

 
 
Date: 23 October, 2013                                                                              (Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal)
                                                                                                                              21-Sunderwala, Raipur
                                                                                                                               Dehradun-248008
                                                                                                                              Uttarakhand                    

Annexure:-

  1. IPO of Rs. 10/- , with IPO No.   17F 549289   as application Fee.