FIRST APPEAL U/S 19(1) OF Right to Information Act, 2005
To, Shri Surjan Pal, OS & Director DECS First Appellate Authority, DRDO RTI Cell, Room No. 240/B, DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg New Delhi-110011Subject: First Appeal under Section 19(1) of RTI Act 2005
Reference: No.DEAL/RTI/0010/2013 dated 3rd September 2013
Sir,
As I am aggrieved by decision/no decision of Central Public Information Officer, I hereby file this appeal for your kind decision.
The reply of CPIO, DRDO, is completely confusing, misleading, incorrect, unjustified and willful not give any information, does not following the spirit of RTI Act 2005.
I hereby submit this appeal u/s 19(1) of RTI Act 2005 for your kind consideration & decision.
1. Details of appellant:-
Name | Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal |
Address | 21-Sunderwala, Raipur Dehradun-248008 |
Mobile | 09411114879 |
email ID | prabhudoon@gmail.com |
2. Details of Central Public Information Officer (CPIO):-
Name & Rank | Dr. Sangeeta Khare , Scientist ‘G ‘ |
Address | DEAL,Raipur Road, Dehradun-248001 |
3. Particulars of Decision/Order of CPIO against which appeal:
Decision vide letter No. DEAL/RTI/0010/2013 dated 3rd September 2013. Copy enclosed as Enclosure -1.
4. Brief facts leading to appeal:-
Sh. R K Agarwal, Scientist ‘H’, (Out Standing Scientist ) Defence Electronics Application Lab, DRDO, Dehradun was promoted wef 1st July 2012.
In DRDO Newsletter September 2012 page No -14. In which the details of Outstanding Scientists of the DRDO.Sh, R K Agarwal, Outstanding Scientist, DEAL “his main contribution has been the development of NARAD, the first semi-static and transportable terminals developed in the country. These terminals were immediately deployed in SRI LANKA during operation PAWAN where they have played a vital Role.”
Sh. R K Agarwal claimed false that he worked and contributed in “Project NARAD”, which was the only real-time successful project and was appreciated by user (IPKF).
Sh. R K Agarwal claimed the aforementioned for his promotion to outstanding scientist and it was published in DRDO’s News Letter September 2012 page No -14 (Copy enclosed)
Departmental Part Order for manpower for Project NARAD reference are DO Part-I No.232/AD dated 18/11/1988 and DO Part-I No.238/AD, No.239/AD dated 24/11/1988. There was clear cut mention in the order that Sh. R K Agarwal was not part and parcel of Project NARAD.
The appreciation letter No 35795/Aks/per date 20th April 1990 by Major A K Singh, 57 Mtn Div. Signal Regiment to ShSurendra Pal, Dy. Director, Project NARAD clearly reveals the names of DEAL’s scientists who participated and contributed their best in the real operation scenario. There is no name of Sh. R.K Agarwal in the appreciation letter.
The DRDO in their RTI reply No.DEAL/RTI/0003/2013 dated 08/04/2013 clearly mentioned that No such document/information is available, means there is nothing available which proves that Sh R K Agarwal was part and parcel of Project ‘NARAD’. It is clear evidence that Sh RC Aggarwal supported Sh R K Agarwal’s false claim for promotion to outstanding scientist because of the only reason of nepotism and castism. (Copy enclosed)
5. Reasons/Grounds for First Appeal:-
- RTI request sent to DoPT and DoPT furnished partly information which is also mark as confidential, but after result it was a open document.(Copy Enclosed)
- DoPT transferred my RTI request to Ministry of Defence for rest information vide their letter no F.No/29/38/2013-EOSM-II Dated 15th July 2013.
- Subsequently MOD transferred to RTI Cell, DRDO vide Mof D ID No 21/(3)/2013(1083)/ D/(RTI) Dt 5/7/2013
- Subsequently RTI Cell, DRDO transferred to CPIO,RAC, DRDO vide RTI/01/2091/P/2013/0178 dated 10th July 2013
- Subsequently CPIO,RAC, DRDO informed me vide letter no RAC/03/RTI/95/2013 Dated 1st August 2013 that my application sent back to RTI Cell, DRDO for further action. (Copy enclosed)
- Unexpectedly I have received 6th September 2013 a letter from CPIO,DEAL, Dehardun stated that they received a letter from CPIO,RAC, DRDO on 20th August 2013 (no letter no reference) stated that the information (Biodata) of Sh R K Agarwal marked as confidential, hence it cannot be disclosed (copy enclosed)
- As Sh R K Agarwal worked in DEAL in various projects and “only those project are classified as secret/confidential which have been sanction under staff project (ARMY/Air force/Navy/ Services Branch, the rest of the project sanctioned to DRDO comes under R&D Projects.
Sh R K Agarwal himself quote in DRDO News Letter (September 2012) that he was associated with Project “NARAD” his claim was totally false and supported by Sh R C Agarwal, Director, DEAL for his promotion to Scientist ‘H’ and this act come under corruption. (“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”)
Corruption – Giving or obtaining advantage through means which are illegitimate, immoral, and/or inconsistent with one’s duty or the rights of others. Corruption often results from patronage)
viii. DRDO is protecting Sh R K Agarwal for his false claim and to stop this corrupt practice in DRDO, it is very well require exposing false claims especially in R&D atmosphere because these practices demoralize young scientists. As CPIO, DEAL already committed in one RTI reply no information and document evidence is available in DEAL regarding Sh R K Agarwal’s claim.
6. Prayer /relief sought for:-
Information sought vide RTI Application dated 28th May 2013 by appellant has been denied on false and invalid reasons by CPIO, DEAL,Dehradun. Therefore, appellant kindly prays to FAA, DRDO to allow this appeal and issue instructions/orders to CPIO,DEAL, Dehradun to provide the information sought as seek by appellant vide his RTI Application dated 28th May 2013 (Copy Enclosed)
7. Grounds for prayer/relief sought for:-
1. CIC decisions on notified organisations 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) In this regard following decisions of CIC are listed for your kind information and consideration.
- CIC/LS/A/2012/002612 dated 22.03.2013 (Dr. Neelam Bhalla Vs DRDO)
- CIC/LS/A/2009/001073 dated 17.2.2010 (Navin Praksh Gupta Vs DRDO)
- CIC/LS/A/2012/002487 dated 31.12.2012 ( Ms. Savitha Vs DRDO)
- CIC/LS/A/2010/000107 dated 26.4.2010 (Ms. K. Surya Kumari Vs DRDO)
- CIC/SM/C/2008/00054/LS dated 29.01.2010 (Shri Prabhat Vs DRDO)
- CIC/LS/A/2010/001277 dated 2.3.2010 (Ram Manohar Singh Vs. DRDO)
- CIC/LS/A/2012/002599 & CIC/LS/A/2012/002146 dated 01.11.2012 (Virender Kumar Vs DRDO)
- CIC/LS/C/2012/001204 dated 9.8.2012 (Rajiv Chauhan Vs DRDO)
- CIC/SM/A/2009/001014/LS dated 09.11.2009 (Navin Prakash Gupta Vs DRDO)
- CIC/LS/A/2009/001073 dated 17 Feb 2010 (Navin Prakash Gupta Vs DRDO)
- CIC/SM/C/2009/00794, CIC/LS/A/2010/00015, CIC/LS/C/2010/000076 dated 18 June 2010 (Navin Prakash Gupta Vs DRDO)
(v) 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. Information sought is related to Estt. Matter/General Routine nature/ Routine correspondence and permissible / allowed by CIC, even after the fact “DRDO is notified organisation under Schedule II”, in various decisions against DRDO.
3. Misuse & wrong interpretation of section 8(1) (j) by CPIO, DRDO HQ: – It appears that either CPIO did not apply his mind on content of information sought or he is supporting corrupt practices of Director, DEAL, Dehradun
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 Landline -0135-2787750, Mobile – 9411114879 Email – prabhudoon@gmail.com Website – www.corruptionindrdo.comAppeal No.:FA/PDD/RKA/DRDO HQ/2013/03
Date: 3rd October, 2013
Enclosure:
(1) My RTI Application to CPIO,DoPT, New Delhi dated 28th May 2013 (2) DoPT reply Dated 15th july 2013 (3) MoD letter Dated 5 th July 2013 (4) CPIO, DRDO Hqrs letter Dated 18th July 2013 (5) CPIO, RAC, letter dated 1st August 2013 (6) CPIO, DEAL letter dated 3rd September 2013 My RTI Application to CPIO,DoPT, New Delhi dated 28th May 2013 To 28th May 2013 The Under Secretary (RR- II ) Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) Department of Personnel and Training Room No. 268 – B , North Block New Delhi- 110011Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right To Information (RTI) Act, 2005 in respect of Sh. R K Agarwal, Scientist ‘H’, (Out Standing Scientist ) Defence Electronics Application Lab, DRDO, Dehradun
As per SRO- 36 dated 9t May 2011 ( FileNo. DHRDn6205IDRDSlRRlClP/10/1022/D(R&D))
Para 2
“(iv) The Peer Committee as specified in Schedule ID shall assess suitability for appointment of Scientist ‘H’, Outstanding Scientist in Defence Research and Development Service”.
In DRDO Newsletter September 2012 page No -14. In which the details of Outstanding Scientists of the DRDO. Sh, R K Agarwal, Outstanding Scientist, DEAL “ his main contribution has been the development of NARAD, the first semi-static and transportable terminals developed in the country. These terminals were immediately deployed in SRI LANKA during operation PAWAN where they have played a vital Role.”
Sh. R K Agarwal claimed false that he worked and contributed in “Project NARAD”, which was the only real-time successful project and was appreciated by user (IPKF).
Sh. R K Agarwal claimed the aforementioned for his promotion to outstanding scientist and it was published in DRDO’s News Letter September 2012 page No -14 (Copy enclosed)
Departmental Part Order for manpower for Project NARAD reference are DO Part-I No.232/AD dated 18/11/1988 and DO Part-I No.238/AD, No.239/AD dated 24/11/1988. There was clear cut mention in the order that Sh. R K Agarwal was not part and parcel of Project NARAD.
The appreciation letter No 35795/Aks/per date 20th April 1990 by Major A K Singh, 57 Mtn Div. Signal Regiment to Sh Surendra Pal, Dy. Director, Project NARAD clearly reveals the names of DEAL’s scientists who participated and contributed their best in the real operation scenario. There is no name of Sh. R.K Agarwal in the appreciation letter.
The DRDO in their RTI reply No.DEAL/RTI/0003/2013 dated 08/04/2013 clearly mentioned that No such document/information is available, means there is nothing available which proves that Sh R K Agarwal was part and parcel of Project ‘NARAD’. It is clear evidence that Sh RC Aggarwal supported Sh R K Agarwal’s false claim for promotion to outstanding scientist because of the only reason of nepotism and castism. (Copy enclosed)
Kindly provide the following informations under the purview of the Right To Information (RTI) Act, 2005
- The certified copy of Sh R K Agarwal’s credentials submitted to then Peer Committee by DRDO for consideration for promotion of Scientist ‘H’ (Outstanding Scientist).
- The certified copy Peer Committee recommendation for promotion of Scientist ‘H’ (Outstanding Scientist) in respect of Sh R K Agarwal
Find the application fee for the request attached with this application. If you feel that above requested information does not pertain to your department then please follow the provisions of Section 6(3) of the RTI Act, 2005/Also as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 please provide the details (Name and Designation) of the first appellate authority w.r.t to your department with the reply to the above request., where I may if required file my first appeal.
I do hereby declare that I am a citizen of India. Kindly provide me with the information at the address mentioned with the application. I request you to ensure that the information is provided before the expiry of the 30 day period after you have received the application.
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 98E 528553
Regards, Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal 21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun-248008 Phone – 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879, e-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com , website- www.corruptionindrdo.com DoPT reply Dated 15th july 2013 MoD letter Dated 5 th July 2013 CPIO, DRDO Hqrs letter Dated 18th July 2013 CPIO, RAC, letter dated 1st August 2013 CPIO, DEAL letter dated 3rd September 2013
Leave a Reply