DRDO Chief Dr. Selvin Christopher dealing sexual harassment case in good spirit but the mindsets of senior officials not ready to co-op him for change of existing rotten handling process of DRDO. The getting justice in sexual harassment case is near to impossible in DRDO women scientist and employees.
There are number of example exists where DRDO management failed to deliver justice and always successes to buried the complaints.
The DRDO workforce of more than 30000 and nearly 20% women are working different level top to bottom, even in good positions like DG, Directors etc but harassment complaints are reaching to national women commission, national schedule cast commission etc is the clear evidence the failure of dealing these incidents by existing system of DRDO inspite of having good number of women official.
The reason is also very crystal clear the top existing women officials are not competent and got their position not on the basis of merit. That is the reason like so called famous scientist not able to give justice to victimized SRF.
In this darkness suddenly DRDO Chief Dr. Selvin Christopher sends direction to IRDE and ITM to deal these sexual harassment cases in seriously as per rule.
But unfortunately both the labs not taking it seriously the following enclose letter is showing the mindset of senior official of IRDE, who are openly violating the VISHAKHA guidelines of Honorable Supreme Court.
In following letter is clear example that how accused is trying to hostile the witness with putting through Director and the letter is trying to perusing through divisional head to witness.
The DRDO Hq directed to Director IRDE to take appropriate action against Admin Officer who gave false evidence in support of accused officer but till date Director IRDE not dare to take any action.
In ITM accused is enjoying his post/position after getting charge sheet. Here interesting fact of DRDO working that during the period three director handle the file, Mr M Kishor, Dr R S Pundir, as additional Charge and Sh Sanjay Tandon but no one able to shift the accuse from post of admin officer. As per rule everyone knows that what action is required after issuing such serious charge sheet.
The best part of Director’s order is the inquiry should be done as per DOPT F. No. 11013/2/2014-Estt (A-II1) Dated July 16th, 2015 but they forgot the following the rules or just giving privilege to accused to harass and manage the witness as he is holding all executive powers of ITM.
As per DOPT F. No. 11013/2/2014-Estt (A-II1) Dated July 16th, 2015
Suspension
- A Government servant may also be placed under suspension before or after issue of a Charge Sheet where his continuance in office will prejudice the investigation, for example if there is an apprehension that he may tamper with witnesses or documents. Suspension may also be resorted to where continuance of the Government servant in office will be against wider public interest such as there is a public scandal and it is necessary to place the Government servant under suspension to demonstrate the policy of the Government to deal strictly with officers involved in such scandals. It may be desirable to resort to suspension in case of misdemeanor involving acts of moral turpitude.
Special provisions to deal with threats or intimidation
- Disciplinary Authority may also dispense with inquiry under Rule I 9(ii), and action may be taken without the inquiry when the Disciplinary Authority concludes that it is not reasonably practicable to hold such an inquiry. The circumstances leading to such a conclusion may exist either before the inquiry is commenced or may develop in the course of the inquiry. Such situation would be deemed to have arisen:
(i) where the Government servant, through or together with his associates terrorizes, threatens or intimidates witnesses who are likely to give evidence against him with fear of reprisal in order to prevent them from doing so; or
(I) where the Government servant himself or with or through others threatens, intimidates and terrorizes the Disciplinary Authority, Members of the Committee, the Presenting Officer or members of their family.
It is requested DRDO officials please go through the Vishakha Guidelines were a set of procedural guidelines for use in India in cases of sexual harassment. They were promulgated by the Indian Supreme Court in 1997 and were superseded in 2013 by The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013.
corrupt and money eater was protect by the lab director. all drdo lab was done 100% corruption work large number scientist taking the money through tender process. in HEMRL pune one ex scientist ‘G’ Mr. Gosh was mange all limited tender in high value. Vendor was manage the e-tender.
You are dreaming.drdo can do any illeagel things. To protect the accused they can file the petions against supreme court guide lines inthe name of goi. Drdo can support the convicted and give clean chit and visilance clearance also against court orders.defence minister keepimg blind fold for his eyes.i give you examples
Most of DRDO top scientists use women scientists / DRTC cadre / hired ladies for their benefits. What National Commission for women can do,,, If one goes to DRDO HQ, DRDO HQ is full of hired poor ladies professional that are being used by top DRDO for their benefits. Whether it is DG, DRDO, Dr Christopher, CCHR, DR Rehman, CCR & M, Dr GS Malik or other DGs in their respective cluster…
Prabhu sir, I have got CDs of their mischievous activities…, if you desire, the same can be shared….
Sure pls share the input which help to correct DRDO present scenario in the interest of nation
Prabhu sir i can’t able to understand hindi fully.in genaral sexual harasssement cases evidances not required. Circumstancial evidances is sufficient.in front of the people never dare to do illeagle activities. What am i understand is sexual harassement and sexual harassement of women at work place is different. The boards constitudef by the drdo is not inconfirmity with the rules. The drdo not bathered for crime against women.