SUJAN DUTTA New Delhi, Jan. 14: The sacking of Avinash Chander as the country’s top defence technocrat yesterday has brought back into focus allegations of murky deals with international arms lobbies, corruption and nepotism, professional jealousies at the top and a failure to deliver usable and accurate weapons.
The rot had institutionalised itself over the years — long before Chander was appointed to the post on May 31, 2013 — and marked even the tenure of his predecessor, V. K. Saraswat. Saraswat was last week appointed as a full member of the Niti Ayog, which took over some functions of the Planning Commission, with the rank of a minister of state.
Defence minister Manohar Parrikar said today that even he had learnt of the sacking of Chander from the media though he had recommended that the office should be held by a younger person. Like Antony, the defence minister in the UPA II regime, Parrikar has also promised a revamp of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) that Chander headed.
In addition to his job as the head of the DRDO, Chander was also the scientific adviser to the defence minister.
In New Delhi, the headquarters of the DRDO is a gleaming block of Jaipur sandstone behind South Block. Entry is restricted. The terrace on the third- floor offers a view of the central vista rivalled only by the buildings on Raisina Hill. It is from here every other month, year on year, that the DRDO makes claims of successful missile tests, and of being avant- garde in technology.
The claims only make for a smokescreen that barely dispels the rot that has set into the government outfit that this year has a budget of more than Rs 15,000 crore for 52 establishments and 30,000 employees, including 7,500 technologists.
DRDO insiders believe Saraswat and Chander never got along though both had similar profiles before rising to the top. Both Saraswat and Chander are missile technologists, both protégés of the original missile man, A. P. J. Abdul Kalam. While Saraswat was credited within the organisation for the development of the surface- to- surface Prithvi missile and its variants, Chander was honoured for his contribution to the Agni series.
Parrikar said the impression that Chander had been given an extension by his government after superannuating in November ” was wrong”. Chander’s appointment for three years was approved in May 2013. Under the terms of the order by the appointments committee of the cabinet, he would retire in November and continue to serve for a further 18 months on a contract.
” And my contention was that such a post of that importance cannot be held by a person on contract,” the defence minister said.
In the UPA regime, Saraswat, Chander’s predecessor, ran into tough times with the establishment himself.
Antony restricted his fiscal powers and instituted an audit of the DRDO by the Controller General of Defence Accounts ( CGDA).
The report by the CGDA said, among other things, that the DRDO was entering into agreements with Israeli firms unnecessarily. It specifically named one Israeli firm, Semi- Conductor Devices Ltd, with which DRDO had entered into an arrangement that the auditors questioned.
” Chander was actually against this,” DRDO insiders say. ” He was trying to source components for missiles from other countries and that probably angered his masters,” alleges Prabhu Dandriyal, a right to information activist who is almost always investigating the operations of the DRDO. The CGDA audit also said that barely 10 per cent of the projects undertaken by the DRDO were eligible for consideration by the users ( the armed forces).
On November 29 last year, a day before Chander was to superannuate, the Prime Minister’s Office, in response to an RTI request from Dandriyal, said it had received three complaints against Chander. Two had been forwarded to the national security adviser and the cabinet secretary. A third complaint was still being studied.
The third complaint was from Navin Prakash Gupta, who is with the DRDO’s Advanced Systems Laboratory ( ASL), a Hyderabad- based outfit that Chander himself headed before moving to New Delhi.
In the seven- page complaint ( with 17 annexures), Gupta questioned the appointment of Chander as the head of the DRDO after two extensions ( till he was 64 years of age) and doubted if he could be called a scientist of ” international stature” as the ACC (appointments committee of cabinet) had remarked in May 2013 ( under the UPA regime).
In other complaints, the DRDO technologists alleged that Chander had promoted Tessy Thomas over other more qualified peers. Thomas was described in media as India’s first ” missile woman” after she was made project director for the Agni- IV missile.
In the complaints, Chander was also alleged to have created a post for Thomas’s husband, a retired commodore from the navy, and accommodated him in a DRDO laboratory, overriding the claims of qualified DRDO employees.
The responses of the government to the complaints are still pending.
Saraswat, after retirement, joined the Centre for Technology and Scientific Studies as its dean. The centre is associated with the Vivekananda International Foundation (VIF), the think tank that used to be headed by Ajit Doval, now the national security adviser.
Sources in the defence ministry said that although Chander would technically serve till January 31, he had been ” attached” to the PMO. He was to have met a delegation from a western country this morning but the appointment was cancelled.
Defence minister Parrikar has said that ” things will happen” in the DRDO. In the weeks ahead, the DRDO will have to be consulted on important technologytransfer issues with the US. An India- US framework agreement on defence is due to be renewed during the visit of President Barack Obama later this month. A revised list of items for technology transfer under a Defence Trade and Technology Initiative ( DTTI) is in the works.
The SA to RM SHOULD BE FROM OTHER SCIENTIFIC ORGANISATION EXCEPT DRDO . these people design develop and make installation from outside agency and credit is distributed among various scientist as system managers and get promotion after every 3-4 years fooling country. The out standing scientist should stand out side DRDO
Sacking of DRDO chief is highly painful, why should a politician who do not know abcd of science should decide a future of scientist or a person who has devoted his life to science. In our country science is never encouraged all what is encouraged is politics which may range from person life to science field. why would best talent join the DRDO if their head is being removed by whims and fancies of politician, if someone is to blame it is the political interference in the DRDO.
If we talk about corruption 90% of IAS officer who decided the country future are corruption along with majority of politician. what a joke both of these group decide the head of scientific organisation in india. Even if there is corruption in DRDO it is of very low amount as most of the scientist except few those who are in top post have any power of sanction.
My dear when DRDO top scientists spend their time not in research or country’s national requirement but busy with corruption and nepotism like our great Avinash ji not did any meeting for DRTC revision since last one year which was directly effect the 25000 DRDO technical officials, but shows his efficiency to create tailor made post for Ms Tessy Thomas’s husband Cmdr S K Patel, he assured that no director should forward any scientist name for said post and after recruitment for Directorship also secured. Made Tessy Thomas Sc H and after that gave her responsibility of Director ASL ignoring lot of deserve ones. So Dear don’t worry these corrupts should leave the DRDO otherwise we will identify them and exposed those in any cost and Modi ji listening the voice of honest countryman.- Jaihind
You may be right but that’s human nature . Modi made smiti irani as minister just like Avinash did Thomas , dame would have you done had U been in such influential position..
I m not saying that this justify the wrong deed.. Definitely we don’t won’t this
The Director appointment can be compared with minister. They can manage with officers, But, Director has to do. Highly qualified and experienced person could not get it because of wrong appointment. One worng appointment spoiled the system. Many qualified Directosr like AK Singh and Staff Officers Rajesh Arora with DSc are roaming around in DRDO Hqs without any work and getting promotions, should be posted to laboratory. They are enjoying the power. SO posts for CCs, DGs and Directors should abolished in Hqs
ABCD seems to be right. The least the RM could have done was to ask Mr Chander to resign immediately, instead of sacking him. After all, who is NOT corrupt?
The Director appointment can not be compared with minister. They can manage with officers, But, Director has to do. Highly qualified and experienced person could not get it because of wrong appointment. One worng appointment spoiled the system. Many qualified Directosr like AK Singh and Staff Officers Rajesh Arora with DSc are roaming around in DRDO Hqs without any work and getting promotions, should be posted to laboratory. They are enjoying the power. SO posts for CCs, DGs and Directors should abolished in Hqs
Great example Dr kaushik’s appointment as Director of DRDE Gwalior spoiled the laboratory. It will take another to bring back DRDE
sub se bada boss of all time corruption is here with us,
Dr. K. Shekhar and Dr. Kaushik who doesnt know science were appointed as Director, DRDE to spoil DRDO labs. K. Shekhar is fit only for drinking after 16.00 hrs. He created a post for one Dr. A. K. Goel and gave outstanding from Sc D to Sc E just he gives company during drinking and appointed as Staff officer. Even after retirement K. Shekhar is made Vice chancellor for Vel University Chennai becoz he brings projects from DRDO to his university. These projects sanctioned by DRDO to Former Directors and Chief Controller should be stopped. Prabhu sir should apply RTI that how much tax payer money is wasted to Former Director and CCs working universities
“The law is well-settled that contract by the State, its corporations, instrumentalities
and agencies must be normally granted through public auction/public tender by inviting
tenders from eligible persons and the notifications of the public-auction or inviting
tenders should be advertised in well known dailies having wide circulation in the locality
with all relevant details such as date, time and place of auction, subject matter of auction,
technical specifications, estimated cost, earnest money deposit, etc. The award of
Government contracts through public-auction/public tender is to ensure transparency in
the public procurement, to maximize economy and efficiency in Government
procurement, to promote healthy competition among the tenderers, to provide for fair and
equitable treatment of all tenderers, and to eliminate irregularities, interference and
corrupt practices by the authorities concerned. This is required by Article 14 of the
Constitution. However, in rare and exceptional cases, for instance, during natural
calamities and emergencies declared by the Government; where the procurement is
possible from a single source only; where the supplier or contractor has exclusive rights
in respect of the goods or services and no reasonable alternative or substitute exists;
where the auction was held on several dates but there were no bidders or the bids offered
were too low, etc., this normal rule may be departed from and such contracts may be
awarded through ‘private negotiations’.”
(Copy of the full judgment is available on web-site of the Hon’ble Suprme Court of India,
i.e. w ww . s up r e m ec ou r t o f in i d a . n i c . i n )
5. The Commission advises all CVOs to formally apprise their respective
Boards/managements of the above observations as well as the full judgment of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court for necessary observance. A confirmation of the action taken in
this regard may be reflected in the CVO’s monthly report.
6. Further, all nomination/single tender contracts be posted on the web-site ex post-facto.
Sd/- (Rajiv
Verma)
Under Secretary
To
All Chief Vigilance Officers