SA’s crises management, after mounting pressure from MoD to take corrective measures to stop the corruption and nepotism.
SA to RM taking some eyewash actions like
Today Dr. Satish Kumar taking charge as Director SPIC instead of Director GTRE (earlier SA wants Dr. Satish Kumar in place of Mr T Mohana Rao) Dr. Satish Kumar is old loyal buddy of Dr Saraswat since IGDMP.
Dr Saraswat patched with Mr S K Jindal and agreed not make Group Captain Raja Babu and he and his lobby pressurizing Mr S K Jindal to take legal action against www.corruptionindrdo.com. (The Pandora Box of DRDO’s corruption)
To 17th July 2011
The Defence Minister
Room No -104, South Block
New Delhi – 110011
Honorable Sir,
The recent serial bomb blast in Mumbai made a big question about the easy availability of such rare explosive RDX & TNT to terrorist outfit.
Please find enclosed document which shows the casual approach of HEMRL, DRDO, Pune the premier and one of the best explosive production facility of India.
While going through the document evidence and audit objection of auditor of JCDA, I found the loose end of HEMRL, DRDO, which may be one easy source for Naxalite–Maoist and Terrorist outfit to learn how to make explosive and also chance to pilferage the explosive may add to pilferage.
After receiving the document I have personally visited the place in the last June and observe the possibility and find out that the working method of HEMRL to make the explosive.
HERML having practice to hire outside manpower to produce explosive and the companies involved in this business is related to ex- DRDO senior officials. Dr Hardwar Singh, Ex- Director HEMRL & present director M/s Viswaat Chemicals Pvt Ltd since 2006), the sources said that earlier he was sleeping partner (his son Bunty was inducted in the firm as an employee) when he was active Director, HEMRL.
The same company is involved in all the branches of HEMRL like ACEM, Nasik, where recently you visited on 29th June 2011 and as per press release of DRDO Dr Hardwar Singh was also present there. The company is working since 2000 under Government Owned Company Operated (GOCO) projects with Advance Systems Laboratory (ASL), SF Complex, Jagdalpur.
Mr S A Borkar, Manager, M/s Viswaat Chemicals Pvt Ltd, is only person responsible to hire the manpower and he is doing purely in unprofessional manner by asking HEMRL employees to bring any person of their contact. No police verification is needed. He used to submit a list to police station and after depositing Rs 100/- get a receipt and that receipt is deposited in HEMRL security and they do not wait for police verification, that applied receipt note solve the formality. On the basis of this the casual labour gets the biometric entry card from HEMRL security. No proper entry mechanism is available in HEMRL or any other places.
The records are only maintained with Mr SA Borakar’s office which was situated in old building of HEMRL. Why it is not maintained in HEMRL security because the number of persons in daily required or as per order is need never comes in and the payment bill was always placed as per order. This practice is also observed by local auditor and mentioned his audit objection.
5. HEMRL having 1200 work force but as per local audit objection for HYE 09/2009 & 03/2010 para (e) “ As per clause 10 of tender specification HEMRL had provided expertise to train the contractors personal up to production stage and raw material formulate the production of TATB (Triaminotrinitrobenzene explosive) to the contractor. In view of the above please intimate that why the production activity was not undertaken by in house HEMRL”
As per para (D) of audit objection “Attendance: As per clause of MOU the contractor has to provide total 173 workmen. On scrutiny of documents it is revealed that no uniform system exists for maintaining the attendance by the Lab in respect of deployed Manpower. As per clause 1.5 of General Terms & Conditions the vendor shall ensure that In and Out records of all personals/workers are maintained at the security gate during the contract period. However the same is not being done.”
As per para B of audit objection” Kindly refer to your letter No HEMRL/MMD/ 3044/SRP 09-10/34 Dt 01-02-10 under which the contractor was asked to submit the License for carrying out explosive and for operation of propellant facility. Please intimate the reasons for asking the requisite license after the commencement of the contract and how the contract was awarded in absence of the requisite license. Unfortunately, till date the contractor has failed to produce the requisite license as promised in their letter date 01-02-10. The action taken by your Lab may be intimated to audit.”
As per para (d) of audit objection” The documentary proof of raw material being brought inside the HEMRL through security gate by the contractor for the production of TATB (Triaminotrinitrobenzene explosive) and the nominal roll of the employees deployed entire operation schedule of production activity may be made available to audit for verification” There is no such records available in HEMRL.
As per para (d) of audit objection” Please intimate the costing formula adopted for fixing the price of TATB (Triaminotrinitrobenzene explosive) @ Rs 11,000/- per KG and whether any concurrence have been obtained from Audit authorities.” The contract rates the working methodology is designed and formulated by Dr Hardwar Singh and Dr A Subhanand Rao, DS & CC R&D – DRDO for siphoned the poor tax payer’s money.
Sir, if you just inquire the file you will find n numbers of mechanism to made money like the product is made in house and the firm only providing the manpower but in their bill they are charging 8.24% excise duty and 4 % VAT, a big question because they are working in DRDO. Who can dare to check? The HEMRL not detecting 10% TDS from the firm in the name of providing specialize service.
The entire nation is aggrieved and as loyal citizen it is our responsibility to protect our country and the national interest. In the name of defence establishment even through employees have noticed the modus operandi they are not coming out because of CCS rules.
The Scientific Adviser’s office is become a black hole. Information/ feedbacks are regularly sent by all Labs and establishments but papers are tear off and put in the dustbin.
Board of Directors – B.Vivek Shetty,Vipin Kumar Jain,Arvind Malhotra, Vishes A Shetty,Shashikant R Shetty, Bhasker M Shetty, Hari Prasanna Shetty, Dr Hardwar Singh(Ex Director HEMRL)
Copy for Information and needful action please
P.CHIDAMBARAM,HOME MINISTER, R.No -104, North Block, New Delhi-110011
R.K.Singh, HOME SECRETARY R.No -113, North Block, New Delhi -110011
Enclosed: The Supply Order Copy HEMRL/08AT/0135/D10/LP dated 03/10/2007 The Supply Order Copy HEMRL/10AT/0136/D10/LP dated 28/12/2009 Copy of Audit Objection HYE 09/2009 & 03/2010 GOCO Audit Objection page 1
GOCO Audit Objection page 2GOCO Audit Objection page 3supply order to Viswaat Chemicals owned by Dr Hardwar Singh Ex -Director HEMRLsupply order to Viswaat Chemicals owned by Dr Hardwar Singh Ex -Director HEMRLsupply order to Viswaat Chemicals owned by Dr Hardwar Singh Ex -Director HEMRLsupply order to Viswaat Chemicals owned by Dr Hardwar Singh Ex -Director HEMRLsupply order to Viswaat Chemicals owned by Dr Hardwar Singh Ex -Director HEMRLsupply order to Viswaat Chemicals owned by Dr Hardwar Singh Ex -Director HEMRL
Universities are autonomous and the Vice-Chancellor is the leader of a higher education institution. As per the norm he/she should be an eminent academician (is Dr Parhalada fulfill this norms?), excellent administrator (is Dr Parhalada fit this norms?) and also someone who has a high moral stature. (Whose vision is “you people are not born for higher studies” for SC candidates) Since his posting as CC (R&D) from November 2005 at DRDO Hqrs he is staying permanently in C-7, DRDO guest house and RTI from JCDA, Delhi revealed that he is drawing HRA. It is attract disciplinary action as per CCS (CC&A) Rules 1965 action against Dr Prahlada. Why action is not taking because DRDO waiting for proper complaint against Dr Prahlada.
Generally the Vice-Chancellor should be a distinguished educationist or eminent scholar in any of the disciplines or professions, with a high standing in his/her field and adequate administrative experience. We are not generally in favour of appointment of persons who have retired from other fields. An exception to this general recommendation should be made only in the case of very outstanding persons whose association with the universities would be desirable from every point of view and should not be made an excuse for ‘accommodating’ or ‘rewarding’ individuals who do not fulfill the conditions laid down. A vice-chancellor is one who stands for the commitment of the university to scholarship and pursuit of truth. (Kothari Commission 1964-66: 334)
A Vice-chancellor should be a person with vision and (have) qualities of academic leadership with ability for administration. He should command high respect among all sections of the society. The Vice Chancellor should be a distinguished academic…(who) has commitment to the values for which the universities stand…He must have the ability to provide leadership to the university by his academic worth, administrative competence and moral stature. (Kothari Commission 1964-66: 334)
The universities need distinguished and dignified persons as VCs and it is necessary to ensure that they are treated with dignity and regard, which the office merits. (Ramlal Parikh Committee 1993: 15)
The Vice- Chancellor is the most important functionary in a university, not only on the administrative side but also for securing the right atmosphere for the teachers and the students to do their work effectively and in the right spirit. (Report of the Committee on Model Act for Universities 1964: 11).
To 17th June 2011The Defence Minister Room No -104, South Block New Delhi – 110011
Honorable Sir,
Recently you said”Transparency revolution to go on” you are the first man in government, who sense this upcoming revolution and we are 100% that you are accepting it in your ministry and preparing the machinery for accountability.
National Technology Day signifies the glorious achievements of Indian science and technology and has been celebrated all over the country after the successful Pokhran II, Nuclear test on 11 and 13 May 1998. .Since 1999, 11 May being celebrated by labs/estts of DRDO with delivering of Technology Day Oration, Open House Session, Quiz, etc. The scientist after their technology day oration was felicitated with medals and commendation certificates signed by SA to RM.
As you already aware of the ugly act of Mr. T Mohan Rao, Director GTRE who was celebrated the glorious achievement of 11th May with the Mr V N Narayan, Agent of ILN Technologies Inc.
Next important point the advocate Mr KKR filed the bail application for Mr. T Mohan Rao, Director GTRE and Mr V N Narayan, Agent of ILN Technologies Inc.
When DRDO’s top project director indulge specially with vendor’s agent how can be Indian forces trust DRDO.
As per your direction the enquiry committee was formed and they already investigated and collected all evidences, but sources said that they are helping Mr. Mohan Rao to come out from this crisis. Dr. V Bhujanga Rao, DS & CC R&D (HR), Dr R Sreehari Rao OS & CC R&D (ECS) and Brig Ajay Gupta submitted their report to SA to RM.
CCS(Conduct) Rules 1964 – If the act or conduct of the servant is so grossly immoral that all reasonable men will say that the employee cannot be trusted.
Find herewith some of the real facts about Sri T. Mohan Rao, Ex..Director, GTRE, who was arrested by Police during a raid 011 a high end massage parlor in Jayamahal, Bangalore on 11th May 2011 (Refer to FIR and Police Report attached)
The raid occurred at around 01.00 PM on Wednesday 11th May 2011. He was enrooting Bangalore airport supposed to board the New Delhi flight at 1630hrs.
He participated in the DRC on 10th May 2011 at Delhi, returned back to Bangalore. He was supposed to go back to Delhi attend another important meeting on 12th May 2011
Incidentally May 11th happened to be “‘National Technology Day'” for DRDO. In the. Calendar of monthly event for the month of May 2011 published in GTRE was supposed to chair the National Technology Day function at 1600 Hrs
He has not made any arrangement for the above function; rather he was busy in going to massage parlour at same time.
He was using official government vehicle whose driver was Mr. Victor. The Driver asked to drop him at a distance place and wait at Mekri Circle near Jayamahal till he return.
Mr T Mohan Rao went with Mr V N Narayana a leading vendor/agent from ILN Tech1oogies, supplying mechanical parts to DRDO and other defence company, who was also arrested with Mohan Rao along with 17 others.
According to records available at GTRE the official vehicle left GTRE around 1200 Hrs along with Mr T Mohan Rao and the driver was Mr Victor and the vehicle reported back at around 2300 Hrs (11 PM)
FIR and police report narrates in detail the event clearly. Wherein T Mohan Rao was caught red handed inside the Room no 1 with the girl naked named Meera Rao.
He carne out on bail on 13th evening, his mobile and identity card was seized by police. He gave wrong address to the police for which he has provided the proof through his lawyer to obtain bail.
The Advocate who filed the vakalath along with bail application for Mohan Rao and Narayan was same i.e. KKR (as per police report)
What is so important work he had in GTRE on 11th May 2011, for which he had spent Government money for the flight charges. He has spent only 3 hours a day in office. ‘What happened to his movement order? Has he appointed officiating Director in his absence?
He has not informed higher official at CC and SA about his arrest.
Has he come to GTRE to finalize some deal with Mr VN Narayana or some vendor through Narayanan? His focus was on these deals, he gave less import to development of Kaveri engine.
Bail order clearly states that the accused shall not tamper with the prosecution witness in any manner. Can he give wrong Information in news paper which his against court order?
He has formed an informal team with those members who were helped facilitated, and supported his immoral, illegal, corrupt practices in GTRE. For their support to carry out immoral, illegal corrupt practices manywere rewarded with not only faster promotion but also other favors like awards, sponsorship, nominations, deputations abroad, temporary duties to out station, financial powers etc by passing superiors.
Sh RV Madhusoodanan, Sc’G’ was given extension in service beyond 60 years Only to look in the civil works inside GTRE and acts as spy for Director GTRE to pass on information about the honest and sincere officers and staff who are not favoring their misdeeds.
Mr. V.N. Narayana of ILN Technologies’ has bagged many orders worth of corers of rupees for supplying engine parts to GTRE and to other defence companies with the tactics support of Mr. T. Mohan Rao.
As Director GTRE. Mr. T. Mohan Rao has made wealth disproportionate to his Income;. Currently he is running a school and planning to start a college. He has contact with politician and higher officials in the state and central government. Using money and power he is trying to cover-up the case.
The offence he has committed by indulging in immoral activities by misusing official power is only the tip of ice berg. He has been arrested and released on bail under ITF act section 3,4,5 & 7 (ITB)
As a government servant, under the provision of central civil services (CCA) rules he has committed serious offence/ conduct involving moral turpitude, misuse: of official power for personal gain, serious negligence and dereliction of duty desertion of duty refusal deliberate failure to to carry out orders of superiors etc.
The enquiry committee formed to look into these matters is trying to hide the fact and helping him. He should have been dismissed from the service; instead he has been transferred to another lab. From there he is working with help of politician, DOP, CC R&D at DRDO Hqrs. and his corrupt supporters in GTRE in to come back to GTRE.
The police seized the identity card of Mr.T Mohan Rao and after got bail on 13th he went to GTRE on 14th May and first thing he did he asked Identity card for himself without giving any excuse. Interestingly the inquiry committee had not taking concern of this act.
Kannada portion on page 3-4 translations.
12. First Information Report Contents
The brief summary of this case is as follows:
On 11-05-2011 CCB W&N unit ACP Shri. R.Lakhsman obtained confirmed information from informant that the Energy Inc, Inner Growth Outer perfection Finishing & Training Academy Therapeutic Healing at 1st floor, Eden Apt., 5th main. JC Nagar, in the name of beauty parlor prostitution was practiced. Based on the confirmed information at 1.00 in the afternoon the CCB officer & staff raided the above said parlor and taken to custody of 10 ladies and 9 gents who were engages in prostitution and confiscated Es 68435 as cash, 15 mobiles, 2 motor cycles, 3 cars and one HDFC Swiping machine.
The above accused has been booked under column number 3,4,5& 7 of ITP act and the file transfer of complaint etc were made
Ref: JC Nagar Police Station Case No.63/4Ull Column 3, 4, 5 & 7 of ITP Act
With reference to the above said subject in the Honorable Court. We submit that 11-05.2011 Shri R Lakhoman ACP, Women & Drug Wing And CCB. Bangalore at 2.00 PM in the office get information that the Energy Inc, Inner Growth Outer Perfection Finishing & Training Academy Therapeutic Healing at 1st floor, Eden Apt., 5th main. JC Nagar, is engaged in prostitution PC Srinivasa, PC Thimmappa reached the spot around 15.15 Hrs wide the presence of Shrl Mohamed Shakil and Mr Mohamed Sami With their presence the place was raided and the re-seen report was prepared and the signature of the witnesses were obtained.
After words, ACP sent PC Srinivas as a Decoy and asked him to make a miss call after initiating the transaction. He was provided with 2500 (2 Notes of Rs.l000 and one Rest 500 Note bearing Nos. 7AQ 667811. 5DS. 199632 and SEC 169580 respectively). The Decoy gave a missed call to ACP after establishing the transaction Immediately the ACP along with the. Witnesses raided No 14 Eden Hall apt first floor. ACP Showed his identity card to Receptionist and asked her name and address, She told her name is Rosrni Maria. C/o..Mohamed.Aslam aged 35 Yrs residing at Srikantapura, Punjapalya, Tumkur Road, Bangalore. She said the owner of this Parlor is Smt Pradeep Madhuri Hingo Rani. Who engaged Sanjana, Sumalatha, Leena, Meera Rao, Ruby, Si-Si-, Kavya, Suhashini and Sara, and run prostitution and use them to carry out Body to Body massage in the name of massage parlor.
On enquiry of a person standing near the cash counter his name is Hemant Kumar, S/o Vasudev, 35 Yrs, #Q’2, 3rd cross 3rd main, Peenya 2nd stage and he came to this place for body to body massage. On enquiry from ACP, Roshni Maria told that she gets Rs.2500 from each customer and do not give any receipt. ACP ask the receptionist where she has sent to Srinivas. She told that she has sent him to Room No.5 with Kavya, after receiving Rs2500. Then the ACP went to Room No 5 and found that the Decoy was half naked and Kavya was totally undressed and was standing naked kissing .the decoy ACP asked them to dress properly and obtained the name and address of Kavya 23 yrs old. She told that she is working as a therapist and serve the customer by kissing and massaging them naked. The parlor owner gives her a salary of Rs 9000 per month. The decoy told that he paid the money to the receptionist. Then ACP enquired the receptionist and confiscated Rs 23000, a mobile 8088278733 where she uses, one more mobile of the owner NOKIA 6303, No. 9845165188 and a HDFC Swipe Machine. When asked about other costumer. She took them to all the rooms.
At Room No.1, Meera Rao was massaging Mohan Rao nakedly they were taken in to custody.
At Room No 2, Leena Das and Sanjana were doing body to body massaging With Narayan M V nakedly. They were taken in to custody.
Room No 3…
Room No 4….
Room No 6…
From, all these people a total cash of Rs 67435, 15 mobiles, 2 Motor Cycles, 3 cars and one HDFC Swipe Machine were confiscated and recorded in CCB items list No 17/2011
In this case A 20 Smt Madhuri accused for running prostitution in the name of massage parlor is absconding and the case to be further investigated.
As per Ref Police Commissioner Office No (2)/Meeting/389/20088 dated 19-11-2008 para -7.6, the case has been registered at J C Nagar police station under No 3,4,5, & 7 of ITP act and further investigation will be carried out.
I have investigated the accused and produced their statements. I have registered the confiscated items recovered from them under reference CCB items no 17/2011
1 A 20 female accused on immoral traffic, further information required
2 Investigation is incomplete
3 Further evidence of A1 to A19 to be collected.
Sd/KR DhadrammaPolice InspectorWomen & Drug WingCCB NT, Bangalore
Sir, you just imagine that if Mr. T Mohan Rao again join back as Director to GTRE and will distribute the awards for Next National Technology Day to children of GTRE employees, what will the feeling of true Indians.
Hope you will take an exemplary action for cleaning the DRDO from corruption and nepotism.
Dr. Rohidas Gopinath TawareAge: 54 yrs. Occupation: ServiceResiding at: A-11, Vijayraj Sankul,Near Medipoint Hospital, D P Road,Aundh, Pune – 411007. — Complainant
Versus
1. Dr. Arun Kumar,
Director of Personnel, DOP, DRDO,
DRDO Bhavan, N. Delhi- 110 105.
2. V. P. Pande,
Associate Director of Personnel, DOP, DRDO,
DRDO Bhavan, N. Delhi- 110 105.
3. I. B. Arora,
Joint Director of Personnel, DOP, DRDO,
DRDO Bhavan, N. Delhi- 110 105.
4. B. B. Sharma,
Joint Director of Personnel, DOP, DRDO,
DRDO Bhavan, N. Delhi- 110 105.
5. S. B. Yadav,
Deputy Director of Personnel, DOP, DRDO,
DRDO Bhavan, N. Delhi- 110 105.
6. Abhinavjeet Ojha,
Deputy Director of Personnel, DOP, DRDO,
DRDO Bhavan, N. Delhi- 110 105. —Accused
Complaint under section 167 and 170 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code
The Complainant most humbly submits as under:-
1. The Complainant was a Gazetted Group ‘A’ Officer with designation Technical Officer ‘B’ in High Energy Materials Research Laboratory (HEMRL), Pune – 411021, the unit of DRDO, Ministry of Defence, Government of India. He joined his
service on 20.09.1983 and was illegally suspended on 24.08.2009 and then illegally dismissed on 30.12.2010. His entire service period is spotlessly clean.
The accused are the ranking officers of the Directorate of Personnel, DRDO, New Delhi. The Directorate of Personnel is the highest office which deals with the personal matters of Central Govt. servants in DRDO. But, the Director of Personnel is not the Disciplinary Authority of the Complainant. As per CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, the Disciplinary Authority of Gazetted Group ‘A’ officer like the Complainant is the Director General Research and Development (DGR&D), New Delhi.
2. Accused No.1 suspended the Complainant under Rule 10 (1) of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 on 24.08.2009. But, as per Rule 10 (1), accused No.1 is not, at all, competent to sign the suspension order of the Complainant. Only DGR&D is competent to suspend or take disciplinary action against the Complainant as he is the only and exclusive disciplinary authority of the Complainant. Accused No.1 has admitted the fact in his deposition as a Defence Witness in the Inquiry Proceeding of the Complainant on 08.06.2010. He prepared the suspension order in a manner which he knew and believed it to be incorrect, intending thereby to cause injury to the Complainant. He does not hold such disciplinary authority; still he pretended to hold an authority to suspend the Complainant and in such assumed character, prepared the suspension order of the Complainant. When the accused No.1 signed and prepared the suspension order of the Complainant without having any authority, his only intention was to cause injury to the Complainant.
3. Accused No.2 has issued the Memorandum under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 on 03.09.2009 and has issued order for appointment of Inquiry Officer. Only DGR&D can issue such order. Accused No.2 knew it well that he does not hold any such authority to issue the Memorandum or order of appointment of I.O. He knew it to be incorrect to prepare such documents, still with the only intention to cause injury to the Complainant, he signed and prepared above referred two documents.
4. Accused No.3 issued order for grant of subsistence allowance to the Complainant on 19.11.2009. By Rule, only DGR&D can issue such order. Accused No.3 knew it well that he does not hold any such authority to issue such order; still with the only intention to cause injury to the Complainant, he has issued such order.
5. Accused No.4 issued Memorandum under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 to the Complainant on 07.10.2009. He issued the appointment order of Inquiry Officer and Presenting Officer on 25.11.2009. By Rule, only DGR&D can issue such orders. Accused No.4 knew it well that he does not hold any such authority to issue the Memorandum or to issue the appointment orders of I.O. and P.O. He knew it to be incorrect to sign and prepare such Memorandum and orders, still with the only intention to cause injury to the Complainant, he has done it.
6. Accused No.5 has issued Penalty Order to the Complainant under Rule 11 (ii) of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 on 08.12.2010. It is the exclusive right of the DGR&D who is the only Disciplinary Authority of the Complainant. Accused No.5 knew it well that he does not hold any such Disciplinary Authority, still with the only intention to cause injury to the Complainant; he prepared this document of penalty order.
7. Accused No.6 issued Penalty (Dismissal) Order under Rule 11 (ix) of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 on 30.12.2010. This is the severe most punishment for the Central Government servant. This is the exclusive domain of the Disciplinary Authority who is the DGR&D.
As per Article 311 (1) of the Constitutional of India, no person who is a member of a civil service of the Union or an All India Service or a civil service of a State or holds a civil post under the Union or a State shall be dismissed or removed by an authority subordinate to that by which he was appointed.
Here, the DGR&D is the Appointing and Disciplinary Authority of the Complainant. Accused No.6 is very much subordinate to him. Still, by flouting the Constitution and CCS (CCA) Rules, he has dismissed the Complainant.
Accused No.1 who is superior to Accused No.6 has admitted that he is not the Disciplinary Authority of the Complainant and he has not suspended him. When the superior officer is not competent even to suspend the Complainant, the accused No.6 who is comparatively the low grade officer, has issued the severe most penalty order of dismissal blatantly without any authority. He knew it well that he does not hold any such authority to dismiss the Complainant from the service. He has done it knowingly and with the sole intention to injure the Complainant.
8. Moreover there are no such posts as Associate Director, Deputy Director, joint Director, Assistant Director or Additional Director in DRDO. No Gazette Notification to that effect is available in DRDO. It has been admitted by Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) in his letter No. DIITM/02/2091/P/2010 dated 20.05.2010.
9. Thus all the accused, the Director and all these so-called Associate, Deputy and Joint Directors from the Directorate of Personnel have committed offence under Sections 167 and 170 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code. They have committed the offence in the discharge of their official duties. The only intention of these officers was to cause injury to the Complainant. From suspension of the Complainant till his dismissal from the service, the accused have jointly done it in furtherance of their common intention to cause injury to the Complainant. Accused No. 1 to 6 are from the same office i.e. Directorate of Personnel, DRDO.
All these accused officers have used DGR&D’s exclusive powers to the exclusion of DGR&D himself.
Thus, all the accused have jointly and severally committed the offence under section 167 and 170 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code.
10. Cause of Action: – First arose on 24.08.2009 when the Accused No.1 illegally suspended the Complainant and was continuous till 30.12.2010 when accused No.6 illegally dismissed the Complainant. The Legal Notice under section 197 of Code of Criminal Procedure was sent to the Secretary, Ministry of Defence on 12.02.2011 for according the sanction. The complaint is well within limitation.
11. Jurisdiction: – All the illegal orders issued by the accused at New Delhi office have been effected at Pune. The offence has been done to the Complainant at complainant’s office of HEMRL, Sutarwadi, Pune – 21. The Complainant was ordered by the accused not to leave his station i.e. Pune during suspension period. Very clearly, the place of offence is Pune. So, this Hon’ble Court has the Jurisdiction to try this complaint.
12. The Complainant, therefore, prays that:-
Process may kindly be issued against all the accused.
All the accused may be punished as per law.
Any other order may be passed in the interest of justice.
Pune
Date: 21.03.2011 Complainant
Advocate for Complainant
(Mr. B R Barge)
VERIFICATION
I, Dr. Rohidas Gopinath Taware Age: 54 yrs, Occupation: Service, Residing at: A-11, Vijayraj Sankul, Near Medipoint Hospital, D P Road, Aundh, Pune – 411007, do, hereby, state on solemn affirmation that the contents in column No. 1 to 12 are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, belief and information. Hence, I verified the same on 21st March 2011 at Pune.
Complainant
Order below Exh. 1 in R.C.C. 1198/2011
1. Perused complaint of complainant recorded u/s. 200 of Cr.P.C. I have also perused the documents filed with list at Exh. 03 and 06 by the complainant. From record; it appears that it is complaint for the offences punishable u/s 167 and 170 r/w. s 34 of IPC. It also appears that all six accused are officers of Directorate of Personnel, DRDO, New Delhi, a body which deals with personal matters of Central Government Servants.
2. As per contention of complainant, accused No.1 had suspended him. In view of Rule 10 (1) of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, accused No.1 was not at all having authority to issue such suspension order of the complainant. Accused No.1 admitted said fact in his deposition before Disciplinary Authority. Said deposition is placed on record at Sr. No.7 at List at Exh. 03.
3. Moreover, accused No.2 issued Memorandum under Rule 14 of above Rules. He had no such authority to issue such Memorandum to the complainant. Moreover, accused No.3, who issued order for grant of subsistence allowance to the complainant, had no authority to issue such order. Furthermore, accused No.4, who issued Memorandum under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, to the complainant, had no such authority to make appointment order of Inquiry Officer and Presenting Officer. Furthermore, accused No.5 issued penalty order having no authority. Accused No.6 issued penalty (Dismissal) order had no authority to issue the same.
4. Thus, in my view, the above evidence on record, prima facie makes out the case for the above mentioned offences, hence issue process against all six accused for the offences punishable u/s 167 and 170 r/w. s 34 of IPC. Matter be kept on 22.07.2011.
Dear friends you are observing in your respective labs that a new trend of extension in service is increasing day by day and the eligible people are missing the goal of top post of lab. Surprisesly the increasing trend is due to blackmailing of higher-ups. Friends carefully observe the list; you will not find any single deserving candidates who are getting extension, because the deserving scientists are not able to get chance of extension in list recommended from DRDO. You will be shocked to know that extension awardees are facing vigilance inquiries and lot of complaints are pending with Criminal cases/civil cases/CVC/Women Cell/CBI/DRDO vigilance cell but due to blackmailing power SA & CC’s are bound to overlook all these and recommend all blackmailers for extensions.
So what is the solution?
All extensions are given on the basis of criteria for grant of extension/re employment to Central Government employees beyond the age of superannuation are laid down in the DoPT O.M.No. 26011/1/77-Estt. (B) Dated the 18th May, 1977
Please go through the following and send your observation about those blackmailer scientists from your respective labs. These blackmailer scientists put others work in their name and you people only can expose their tactics because the ministry officials who process the file are non technical they cannot assess the game plan of these intellectual scientific mafia’s.
Subject : Grant of extension/re-employment to Central Government servants beyond the age of superannuation – issue of instructions regarding.
The undersigned is directed to say that the criteria for grant of extension/re employment to Central Government employees beyond the age of superannuation are laid down in the DoPT O.M.No. 26011/1/77-Estt.(B) dated the 18th May, 1977. After May, 1998 and when the age of retirement of the Central Government employees increased from 58 to 60 years, some of the instructions contained in the O.M. dated 18th May, 1977 referred to above have lost their relevance. Accordingly, it has been decided to revise the instructions relating to extension/re-employment to Central Government employees.
2. In the absence of specific orders to the contrary by the competent authority, a Government servant must retire on the due date. The date of superannuation of a Government servant is known in advance and ordinarily there should not be a question of failure to make arrangements for his release sufficiently in advance. It is the responsibility of the administrative authority concerned to ensure that the Government servants under their control retire on the due date.
3. Extension: F.R. 56(d) states that no Government servant shall be granted extension of service beyond the age of 60 years. However, provisions exist in the rules to grant extension of service to certain category of Government servants only. Therefore, it must be ensured that no Ministry/Department should propose to grant extension in service unless the case is covered by the Rules.
4. The proposal for grant of extension in service to the categories of personnel referred to in the first, second and third proviso to F.R. 56(d) -2- shall be referred to the Estt. Division of Department of Personnel and Training two months prior to the date on which the individual concerned is due for superannuation. The procedure for grant of extension to the Scientists is laid down in DoPT d.o. letter No. 28/19/2000-EO(SM-II) dated the 10th July, 2000.
5. Procedure for consideration of cases for extension of specialists in the medical and scientific fields:- It should be appreciated that even in the case of extension to specialist in the medical or scientific fields, it is not only the next man who misses promotion but often several people miss consequential promotions all along the hierarchy. Thus, too many cases of extension in service or reemployment are likely to cause frustration and affect the morale of the upcoming scientists who have exposure to latest technological developments in connecting fields. Keeping in view these circumstances, the following criteria and procedure has been evolved with a view to ensure that extensions in service to the superannuating scientists are resorted to only in really exceptional circumstances. The overriding consideration for the grant of extension is that it must be in the public interest and in addition satisfy one of the following two conditions:-
i) that the retiring specialist is not just one of the outstanding officers but is really head and shoulders above the rest; or
ii) that other specialists are not ripe enough to take over the job.
Test (ii) would be satisfied only if there is shortage in particular specialization, or if it is not possible to find a suitable successor or if the specialist is engaged on a work or project of vital importance, which is likely to produce results in a year or two. If specialists in the next lower post are not eligible for promotion on the ground that they have not put in the minimum service in the lower grade prescribed under the rules, no promotions can be made to the higher grade, unless such specialists put in the requisite length of service. But specialists who are eligible for promotion to the post against which extension is recommended, should not be rejected solely on the ground that they do not have as much experience as the retiring specialist. They should be considered for promotion according to the -3- recruitment rules and if they are found suitable they should be promoted to the posts being vacated by the retiring specialists.
6. Whenever any specialist is considered for grant of extension, his character roll and personal file should be carefully scrutinized and all other relevant information that may be available should be taken into account to judge whether the specialist had good reputation for integrity and honesty. In cases where the specialist is not considered to have good reputation for integrity and honesty, he should not be considered for grant of extension in service. The appropriate authority in the Administrative Ministry should furnish a certificate of Integrity along with the Annexure-I as follows where it proposes to grant extension of service.
“Having scrutinized in character roll and personal file of
Shri/Smt./Kum._____________________ and having taken into account all other relevant available information, I certify that he/she has a good reputation for integrity and honesty.”
7. While making proposals for extension of service in higher posts, it is all the more necessary to apply higher standards of efficiency to persons whose appointments to the higher posts are recommended for approval of the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet. The number of top posts is bound to be very limited and a few persons should not have them for too long. No Government servant who is on extension of service after the prescribed date of retirement should be promoted to another post during the period of extension of service.
8. No extension of service should be considered on the ground that a suitable successor is not available unless it is established that action to select a successor had been taken well in advance but the selection could not be finalized in time for justifiable reasons. A proposal for the grant of extension of service based merely on the consideration that the specialist’s predecessor had been given extension should obviously not be accepted. -4-
9. Re-employment: No proposal for employing a government servant beyond the age of superannuation of 60 years shall be considered. It is also clarified that no person can be appointed/ reappointed to Central Government service after the age of superannuation of 60 years through contract.
10. Re-employment of military pensioners who have not reached the age of superannuation for Central Government employees will not be governed by these instructions.
11. Appointment of Consultant:-
Detailed instructions have been issued for appointment of consultant vide DoP&T’s Office Memorandum No. 16012/7/97-Estt.(Allowance) dated 13th February, 1998. Hindi version will follow.
Sd/-
Mrs. Pratibha Mohan
Director (E-II)
To
All Ministries/Departments of the Government of India.
(As per standard list)
Annexure-I
Performa for sending proposals for approval of Department of Personnel & Training for grant of extension to Government servants beyond the age of superannuation.
1. Designation of the post:
2. Duration of the post :
3. Scale and terms of the post and perquisite attached, if any:
4. Whether financial sanction for the creation of the post/continuance of post for the duration shown at (2) has been obtained:
5. Method of recruitment:
6. Name and the terminal date of appointment of the outgoing incumbent of the post:
7. Name of the specialist proposed for appointment and the service to which he belongs:
8. Full service particulars of the Officer with date of birth and pay drawn:
9. Names of other Officers considered:
10. If promotion post, whether copies of proceedings of a D.P.C. are being enclosed? If not, why not?
11. Whether character roll of the specialist proposed and those considered are being sent. If not, why not?
12. Please indicate:
(i) (a) Whether the post is scientific or medical specialist.
(b) Periods of extension granted earlier to the officer, if any
(c) Date from which extension is to be granted.
(d) Period of extension of service.
(ii) Justification for grant of extension:
(a) The date from which it was known that vacancy would occur.
(b) Action taken to select a successor with chronological details.
(c) If selection is being made, reasons why this could not be finalized in good time.
(d) Can some officiating or ad-hoc arrangements be made, pending fresh appointment by proper selection? If not, why not?
(iii) Whether orders of the Minister-in charge have been obtained?
13. Whether the prescribed Integrity Certificate, from the appropriate authority, is enclosed.
: Sh Avinash Chander, CCR&D(MSS), Member Inquiry Committee
Letter from A L S & Admin Asstt.s DRDO HQRs
Dear Shri Dandriyal Ji,
Namashkar,
We appreciate your efforts to bring out website relating to DRDO. We congratulate you for good work initiated.
We have also gone through the letters speaking about DOP. This is to bring in your notice that this DOP is very helping to juniors like us. Anybody can meet him and get his difficulties removed.
Certain senior persons like CC’s are not very happy because of his positive attitude towards junior officers. Dr. Neelam Bhalla, Sc. F is also blaming and complaining against him for not getting promotion and also for her transfer done by higher authorities. We came to know that DOP’s daughter has been the gold medalist form Delhi University. Since we are in HQRs and we know DOPs behavior towards us that is why we informed you. Rest you know better what to do.
We will request you to keep the momento so that objective is achieved
With regards,
Yours sincerely
A L S & Admin Asstt.s
DRDO HQRs
The above letter I have received on 4th June by ordinary post.
My friends of ALS & Admin DRDO, thanks for your appreciation and encouragement of my humble effort to improve the work atmosphere of DRDO.
I have been and born and brought in DRDO environment, I have witnessed the drastic downfall of DRDO working environment. DRDS and DRTC laid down the path of corruption and nepotism. The whole workforce of DRDO turned un-productive by imported NRI’s who were inducted time to time in DRDO main stream. They simply used their management skills to give direction to HR and technical force to engage in corruption and nepotism, so the One Lakh Corers infrastructure and the mighty Thirty Thousand scientific and Technical manpower may become unproductive and remain busy with day to day survival affairs like rat race of promotions & awards etc.
I am not fighting with any individual of DRDO official but you people just think if your deserving daughter and son was also an eligible candidate for the Scientist B and Dr Arun Kumar misused his power and did all kind of manipulation to give appointment to his daughter. Because of his act, your son/daughter was deprived to get appointment and then what was your reaction. Please think of other eligible candidates who were more deserving and needier then corrupt Arun Kumar’s daughter.
The sanction list of 129 posts of scientist B was not having stream of Environment Biology.
Arun Kumar tried to get consent from Director DRDE that environment biology candidate can be adjusted in Biotechnology but the fax massage I have seen that shows negative comments of Director, DRDE.
Then he tried to get same advice from Director DIPAS but he also refused by fax but by pressure he wrote few lines in his own handwriting that with some minor course it can be consider. But it was all fake comments.
You can see the list and marks of eligible candidates they are far better. The screening committee was designed and approved by Arun Kumar.
The Board was design and approved by Arun Kumar and the best part of the board was the faculty of Environmental Biology was the board member. The honorable Supreme Court had already passed the order if the faculty or guide of any candidate is board member the selection of such candidate is invalid.
If you people see the whole process of Arun Kumar’s Daughter’s selection even lay man can sense the manipulations.
If you people check the seniority of Scientist C you will find now Arun Kumar forged the roll and put her daughter qualification as MSc Biotechnology. If everything is fine then what is the reason to forge the seniority role.
The helpfulness of Arun Kumar, I have observed in the case of Dharmender Kumar, but the corruption behind the scene you people not want to see.
Prof. S K Salwan who is chairman of committee investigating the DOP, Arun Kumar case is made chairman of ‘NAGARATANAM’ project having annual budget of Rs. 80 Lakhs and having monthly salary of Rs. 1 Lakh. He is favoring Arun Kumar with the help of SA to RM
As Arun kumar helped Prof. S K Salwan in getting this job how can he make a impartial inquiry of his case. Other person member of inquiry Avinash Chander was made CCR&D(MSS) so he is also helping him.
The officer V P Pande, Jt. Dir, DOP is given direction by DOP to manipulate the case file of DOP’s daughter, extension file and Dharmender’s case.
Prof. S. K. Salwan is staying at DRDO Guest house at Development Enclave in Delhi Cantt, Where SA to RM is also staying. There Prof. S. K. Salwan is staying along with his mentally retarded only son. His son is taken care by DRDO guest house staff and in return he is helping to dilute the DOP’s daughter case inquiry.
Now my friends of DRDO if you know any above information is wrong then please send me the correct information and advise me and help me to expose the corrupt official of DRDO, so that DRDO may take a new shape of productive hand of Indian Defence and we will be proud as part of country’s asset.
To 6th June 2011The Defence MinisterRoom No -104, South BlockNew Delhi – 110011
Subject: Refer to your D.O No 2236 VIP/RM/2011 dated 20th May 2011
Honorable Sir,
Your reply to my letter 15th may 2011 has proved your greatness and deep concern about the prevailing corrupt activities in DRDO.
On 3rd June 2011 you have given a call to deliver AGNI-5 on the occasion of DRDO award ceremony. Some truth which has become de-motivation factor to young scientist who are hard working and dreamed to develop defence related systems are shattered. The reason is very simple since 1999 to motivate DRDO scientists, DRDO Hqrs has managed to distribute the funds (More than 1 crore) in the Annual Mela to those scientists whose contribution in science and technology development is nil. These awards are given to “yes man” on one subject to my knowledge and can be verified from DRDO Hqrs four people have received Scientist of the Year award without any contribution. As an example the gentleman who developed Satcom terminal was thrown out of DEAL,DRDO in 1991-92 and then Director received the Scientist of the Year award on Satcom technology, again on the same product while it was non functional in any of the defence specific mission but another Scientist of the Year award. Third time in 2004-05 again for same product Sh Ashok Sen received the award and now for the same product Sh RC Aggarwal & his team has given AGNI award.
The interesting fact is that this product was not used in either KARGIL WAR or deployed any where, but the work done by Dr E Bhagirathe Rao, Chanchal Kumar Chatterji has become a “Kamdhenu Cow” for above great – great scientist.
Brig Swaminathan , director finance was also one recipient of Scientist of the Year award for his contribution in managing funds in DRDO Hqrs
Sh I D Gaba Director RAC/ DOP was awarded Scientist of the Year award without any scientific contribution.
Even a scientist who has spend his life in managing conservancy casual staff, if he is a yes man, he is getting the Scientist of the Year award.
DRDO Hqrs can easily be fooled, the award committee and finally the honorable minister. Since Defence minister is simply endorsing without any query of the achievements of individual.
I have asked some citations of few awards recipients under purview of RTI Act 2005 as Padma awards citations and other details are also available for common people, but as usual DRDO used shelter of schedule –II of RTI Act and matter is under screening of CIC.
AWARDS ARE GIVEN TO MOTIVATE BUT IN DRDO THE AWARD HAS BEEN PROVED DEMOTIVATING FACTOR.
I would like to thank you on behalf of all Indian citizens that, at least you have taken good step to remove Sh. T Mohana Rao from Directorship of GTRE, Bangalore and I have also received the information from my sources at DRDO Hqrs that you have directed your officials to investigate similar case of Director DLRL. If you or your officials need the proper evidences against Director, DLRL I am ready to provide them as I am also fighting to clean DRDO from corruption and nepotism so that DRDO start shining in Indian Defence Sector.
Hope you will look in to the matter ofC in same spirit.
Mohana Rao says he was on his way to airport on the night of May 11, and took a detour to the spa to enquire about treatment for his wife’s spondylitis; the police are not convinced
Sameer Ranjan Bakshi
Posted On Saturday, May 21, 2011 at 10:48:23 AM
Mohana Rao, the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) scientist who was arrested by the police during a raid on a high-end massage parlour in Jayamahal on May 11, claimed that he was simply at the wrong place at the wrong time. He said that though his family was obviously disturbed by the incident, his wife “fully supports and believes me.” (Top defence scientist netted in Jayamahal massage parlour raid)
But the police who raided the high-end parlour are not buying Mohana Rao’s protestations of innocence. “Normally, we do a lot of homework before conducting such raids. To doubly ensure that we are not on the wrong track, we use a decoy — a policeman goes into the spa posing as a customer. It is only after ascertaining that something illegal is happening does the raid follow,” a senior police official, who supervises such raids, but is not formally authorised to speak to the media, said.
When Bangalore Mirror reported the story (‘Top defence scientist netted in Jayamahal massage parlour raid’, May 20), Mohana Rao claimed that he had gone to the spa to enquire about treatment for his wife’s spondylitis. Close to midnight? Why this particular spa? These were some of the obvious questions.
On Friday, Mohana Rao fully explained what happened. Apparently, on that fateful night, he was on the way to the airport to catch a flight and suddenly remembered about his wife’s ailment. So he called up Just Dial seeking addresses and phone numbers of reputed spas. They gave him five to six numbers. “My wife and I are members of Ayush at Indiranagar. My wife has spondylitis and neck pain. To get better treatment, we thought of enquiring with other spas. On that particular day, I was on my way to the airport. Since I am a busy person I thought of enquiring about some spas on my way to the airport,” Mohana Rao said.
He added that he decided to go to Energie Inc since he was then near Mehkri Circle and this was the closest place among the ones Just Dial had mentioned. He revealed that while he was talking to the spa people about the facilities and treatments they had, the police raid took place. “The police caught me from behind. I tried to explain to them but they didn’t listen to me and took me along with them,” he said.
When asked how his family reacted, he replied: “This is a very delicate issue. My wife supports and believes me. I am nearing 60 and have family and children; why should I go in for such things. People know me and my professional qualities. I visited the spa but for a very different purpose.” Though the cops arrested him under the Immoral Trafficking Prevention Act following the 11 pm raid, Rao maintained that he was trapped.
SEARCH ON FOR SPA OWNER Meanwhile, the cops have stepped up the hunt for the owner of the spa who is absconding. Police Commissioner Jyotiprakash Mirji said: “We have sent look out-notices to all airports about Madhuri Hingorani, the owner of Energie Inc. A special team has been formed to nab her. We will continue to conduct more raids to make Bangalore a safe city.”
Hingorani, has allegedly been running the parlour for the past two years, and was reportedly in London during the May 11 raid.
Comment (38 Comments Received) by Bangalore mirror
It is unbelievable although looks like poteential fact. It is not clear which flight he was trying to catch at 11 pm on May 11th? Is it domestic or international? If the news is true it can be his personal taste. Nothing to do with his profession !!! many people drink, smoke like that prostitution Belakappa Khatedar (name Changed) Dated : Saturday, May 21, 201110:12 PM
Imagine the plight of ladies working under such director.DRDO is high security zone but ladies working in DRDO are very unsafe. prabhu Dated : Saturday, May 21, 201109:56 PM
Mr. Sathya Murthy, What is your email address. Like to know more about this gentleman. Sincerely aerospace Dated : Saturday, May 21, 201107:01 PM
I can give more information about this Scientist who has done all type of nonsense things except contributing to the task expected out of him. If you are interested in knowing the details plese let me know via email so that i can pass it on from my email Sathya N Murthy Dated : Saturday, May 21, 201105:23 PM
@pranav, The police have explained they had sent a decoy posing as a customer and only after it was confirmed the message parlor was offering other kind of services the police moved in. Is it sheer concidence there were 19 men in a message parlor at 11 in the night ? And if this scientist who hold such a high position in a central government organization was honest why did he avoid giving his identity ? If he was really not guilty he could have got somebody to approach the Police Commissioner or even DGP or Home Secretary etc to get him out. Raj Dated : Saturday, May 21, 201102:55 PM
It is shameful, but not uncommon. DRDO Scientist are used to involves in ths. Girls are appointed as PA or JRF and get promoted to sc C in 3years. same time promoted to higher positions in no time. It is in every lab and SA used to remain silent here. surya Dated : Saturday, May 21, 201101:14 PM
If visiting a parlour is a crime that needs to be exposed, then the first case must be lodged against B Mahesh editor (?) of Bangalore Mirror and DV Dwarkanath for publishing advertisments of parlours as well as of criminal intimidation (Section 506) for trying to ruin a person’s dignity in the absence of conviction. Since the newspapers are also hosted and accessible on the web, as per Section 292 (1) , Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act , the editor and publisher are liable to be held and booked for encouraging indecent representation. Moreover, as per THE IMMORAL TRAFFIC (PREVENTION) ACT 1956,as Mirror has published the details of the parlours, it is acting in-concert or as a pimp and can be held accountable. Mohan Dated : Saturday, May 21, 201111:10 AM
Here are couple of questions
1. Here any crime has been done?
2. Why Mirror in page 34 accepts the
advertisement and also TOI and other
papers also advertise about massage
parlours I see when I go thru
classifieds etc
3. These advt are there for many years
what this media was doing till now
4. If this is a crime or an offence
then what authorities like police
allowed such parlours to operate?
Think police doesn’t know about all
these days, very much aware.
5. It is shameful act by police for not
taking any actions until now and
allowed to grow
6. Mirror for money advetises such adds
and police take bribe to hide the
crime on the above, whch act is good
here??? pranav Dated : Saturday, May 21, 201112:49 AM
Why put up the faces of people who were there and what will happen to their life now. The culprit who running the business should have been exposed more than any one and punished accordingly for the offence. Otherside who allowed them to run this first of all. They have advertised in papers for many years. All those years what the Police departments were doing. Why suddenly this alarm. General public knows very well that police has under hand delaings in these cases. Including thieves. If this is a serious offence then how about policemen taking bribe from every hawkers and from bove business. Better govt delas with seriously. pranavblr@rediffmail.com Dated : Saturday, May 21, 201112:35 AM
Well its no wonder that after more than 20 years and spending thousands of Crores of Indian Tax payer money, nothing worthy has come out of this organization. What can we expect when the morality of the its leader is in question. Just an example of the rot prevalent in our country. Indian Dated : Friday, May 20, 201110:07 PM
I think it is shameful on the part of the Daily Mirror to tarnish the image of such a large R bloomark Dated : Friday, May 20, 201109:53 PM
It is very unfortunate. And I see some comments in his favor. I agree that if he has done something wrong than the full organization need not to be blamed. But at this level when one is holding such a responsible post one should take care of his actions. he should not betray nation trust. whatever the man has done is so disgusting, i don’t have more words for him. nothing personal and professional here. you have to sacrifice something to hold nation dignity. otherwise you don’t deserve it. you can not enjoy both same time otherwise what is the difference between you(as ruler) and we(as aam aadmi). Why then You should rule. at last whatever happened is only tip of the ice. … Aam aadmi Dated : Friday, May 20, 201109:31 PM
The real question is: Is there a nexus between Narayan and Mohan Rao. Narayan has been a major vendor with dubious background. Narayan will do anythig to get a business. Did Mohan Rao fall into this greed and has he benefited Narayan greatly? It is now required to probe into every deal Narayan has stuck with GTRE and other Defence organizations. He seems to be the pimp in this case. Neutral Dated : Friday, May 20, 201108:58 PM
Governor of AP was caught by misusing his official residence. This man does not mis use any of his official powers. Why to make such noise. After all he also a human being having ves and -ves. chandu Dated : Friday, May 20, 201108:49 PM
Why give him an extension? He is spending it in Jayamahal Extension! James Gurung Dated : Friday, May 20, 201108:22 PM
He is an Outstanding scientist and contributed to his best to the nation. One cannot link his personal life with his carrier. He didn’t do any injustice. Its purely his personal. chandu Dated : Friday, May 20, 201108:20 PM
I was told that Mr.Rao was watching his staff through CCTVs fixed all over the campus;but now he is being watched by people in television channels for wrongful reasons. subbu Dated : Friday, May 20, 201108:10 PM
Ok that is his personal. but he is a govt servant. and this act is unbeing of a govt servant as per CCS conduct rules. And how did he use his official vehicle for this act. suresh Dated : Friday, May 20, 201107:01 PM
Jai Mohan Rao!This is not the question of personal and professional life. It’s the question of head of one of the major DRDO who handles strategically important national projects, exposed to environment which could lead to interactions with enemies of this country. Mr. Mohan Rao is not an uneducated innocent person who can be unknowingly trapped at such a place. What was he doing there at 11 PM on a working day? Why should he travel all the way from C V Raman Nagar to Jayamahal for a genuine massage if he is not a regular visitor? The growth he had at GTRE in a very short span of time to Scientist H; where he was able to achieve and maintain director post for a long time is artificial compared to DRDO standards. What GTRE has done exceptionally good from 2005 onwards in his tenure which was not done by any of the previous directors which grant him a two years extension after retirement period? Only reason for all these is his political nexus. If he needs to maintain the political contacts he should have constant source of heavy funding. To have this funding he should use his office powers to generate it. Once you start generating it you don’t mind if it’s a vendor, contractor or enemies of this country. We should take this as a wakeup call to fight against such black holes in our system. Indian Dated : Friday, May 20, 201106:46 PM
This type of character assassination is really bad. Does anybody always ensure that a shop or place being visited is totally safe from any raids. Even innocent people do get trapped in such situations ak Dated : Friday, May 20, 201106:37 PM
hey have done it again !!!! The police full of valour,good behaviour,morality and ofcourse honesty have done a great deed again. We all know, they stand at strategic traffic pints and check vehicle documents of hapless two wheeler riders for the sole purpose of ensuring safety for all. Police ensure that no illegal activities are carried out anywhere in Karnataka,that is why we don’t find any illegal shops anywhere ! Great,this is equalent to catching of Osama!!!! K.M.CHANDRAN Dated : Friday, May 20, 201106:23 PM
Sir,
It was a unpleasant to see top scientist in massage palour,but being such high person and done so much for the country was it right to bring out his name,your paper itself advertises dozens of massage palaours. It was unapporiate to bring out his name and maling him.morals are all time
low no one is a saint. Your report only brings in bad journalism
Dr Basha Dated : Friday, May 20, 201105:59 PM
This gentleman, normally in drunken mood, when removed his tie and suit, and ask any common man to identify him, surely he will identified as roadside rogue based on his talk and appearance and exploitations. He is well known for his attraction for Wealth, Wine and Woman (even his house maid or casual laborer in office, no problem). He is most corrupt, arrogant and politically savvy. That is why he is still in post with an extension of two years service because he is Outstanding Scientist (what for, no body knows. By this time he should have been dismissed from service, but DRDO will not do that because there are many more like this in key postings and they are morally bound to protect this honourable man. Jai India and Save DRDO Suhas Dated : Friday, May 20, 201105:56 PM
Not only T Mohana Rao there more corrupt senior scientist are in DRDO who are enjoying their extensions with all these kind of activities with tax payers money the news shows T Mohana Rao was in the company of N E Narayana, a contractor who supplies mechanical parts to DRDO. The all fake vendors are felicitating the scientists by all kind of dirty practices please visit corruptionin drdo.com to seethe ugly acts of DRDO corrupt officials Prabhu Dandriyal Dated : Friday, May 20, 201105:48 PM
It is true the incident happened 10 days back and the news was published in local /regional newspaper in addition to TV 9 Kannada had shown special episode. It is very clear from the accompanied person being a business person benefited illegally from GTRE –DRDO or hard earned money of poor taxpayers. The kick back is being paid as female service in addition to money. It is very true the Mr Mohana rao is very power full and dynamic in every way of life. Same time his corruption in office has made him to make own school and college in Bangalore in addition to other things. He could make mouth shut GTRE Union which most active among other DRDO unions (Union was infamous for making darna for poor quality of paper in diaries and sambar in canteen) and women cell chairman who shouts about women safety at office and outside. These days everything possible over telephone call “I have come to fix an appointment for my wife for tomorrow” is ridicules and that too with a vendor on official vehic le http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvUPr_ 3NGSE Balu Dated : Friday, May 20, 201103:39 PM
Hohan rao has done great insult to the sientist community of DRDO. Now the nation understands that instead of involving in indeginisation of A/c Engine he is involved in R vico Dated : Friday, May 20, 201103:22 PM
It is a greate shame that the deffence research BABU’s are more concentrating on teen agers who are like threre grand daughter in doing there massage afairs than there Projects at the cost of public money such a BABU’s are to be punished and there iligal assets are to be recovered ram Dated : Friday, May 20, 201103:10 PM
The immoral people who are leading the prestigies deffence Estt, with the blessings of our political leaders and ministers are to be seriosly vieved and saked i middiatly. gundappa Dated : Friday, May 20, 201102:51 PM
We already know the way our prestigious DRDO scientist work. Vijay Dated : Friday, May 20, 201102:03 PM
Persons when selected to such higher level should have proper viligance clearances and these weakness should be noted, since these posts are very sensetive in nature and having persons of such weaknees is security threat to the nations where anybody can use this as a blackmail. Let this be lesson to other DRDO sceintis ts. Ajay Dated : Friday, May 20, 201102:02 PM
He is not the only one to visit such places, because Netas and Babus also visit the same type of places around the city and outside as well, and sometines have those from such places visit them. As the head of GTRE, he should have been more careful and should have not giving wrong information when caught. If as he says he was there for an appointment for his wife, fine, but why give wrong information to the cops, something fish is there. People in high places always stumble in low places. Nothing new. P.R Dated : Friday, May 20, 201101:16 PM
people who are living on his blessing will always advocate his act as we have seen some comments.the person who is representing more that 2000 people of a organisation should take care of his image very carefully. persons who are immorally incorrect will advocate his act.tomorrow our PM CM DM will caught in this kind of activity will you accept it? answer is never…then why one should accept this kind of scientist leader who is immoral.head quater should take serious action against him and sack him immediately so that he will have more time for his family and friends prashant Dated : Friday, May 20, 201112:25 PM
GTRE is a fine instution,and so are its Scientists. This is done to tarnish his image. Sad that media is sensationalising things. aerospace Dated : Friday, May 20, 201111:36 AM
What important is whether he went there as GTRE director or normal male. He has his needs and one has to respect his privacy and dont link his profession to personal life. Why sensationalise stale news… There are many more pressing things to think about.. Indian Dated : Friday, May 20, 201111:33 AM
He has been trapped unknowingly by some unscrupulous people due to his tough and demanding nature. He is a very humble kind and helpful person whom I personally know for around two decades.I am sure the truth will come out very soon and the guilty will be punished. wellwisher Dated : Friday, May 20, 201111:27 AM
The matter is 10 days ago, surprised to see it being published today, it is done so to tarnish the good image of the person which is purely his personnal matter nothing to do with his profession or organisation, moreover he has gone unknowingly about the place coaxed by some vendor for a massage/relaxation which is required for a strained human being. It is very unhappy that the media is exagerating things gajju Dated : Friday, May 20, 201111:12 AM
It is very unfortunate and could have been avoided. But the profession and the organization is nothing to do with his personal life and after all he is also a human being and a common man. It is very sad that the media has projected the Organization and the Scientific community as if it is involved in such crime which is not true.Let the law deal with the case and punish if he is guilty but let us not blame the Organization for this inc ident M.R.Chandrashekar Dated : Friday, May 20, 201109:04 AM
Ghhh Re Dated : Friday, May 20, 201107:39 AM
Address of
Shri T. Mohana Rao, Out Standing Scientist, Director Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE) Phone Number Office = 080-25240698 Residence Number -080-25241892 Email Id – director@gtre.drdo.in, director@drdo.org Address- E/1 Director’s Enclave DRDO Township, Phase –I CV Raman Nagar Bangalore – 560093
Appeal to clean DRDO of corrupt and anti-national officials
