To 11th March 2015
Hon’ble Shri Manohar Parrikar, Defence Minister, Room No -104, South Block, New Delhi-110011
SUBJECT: Regarding 25 questions asked by government for improving DRDO.
Sir,
Government is putting his whole heartedly efforts to improve the DRDO in the interest of defence preparedness and properly utilization of govt. fund as well as the turning DRDO in delivering mode. Government floated 25 questions to understand the DRDO problems that why after spending so huge amount not able to deliver single 100% indigenous system.
Unfortunately, government is seeking answer from those who are the responsible for gutted DRDO in this stage. How can they accept their incompetency, they are not so generous because they were not even take seriously KARGIL WAR failures. The Gen Malik openly told the country “We had one or two incidents particularly on the weapon-locating radar. If the DRDO had not come in the way we would have got them before the Kargil war and that would have definitely reduced our casualties,” he told Karan Thapar on Devil’s Advocate programme on CNN-IBN.
One question out of 25 questiosn is – What DRDO is doing to make quality scientific manpower pool larger than what is available, to make it much more competent and qualitative, and what kind of facilities and infrastructure DRDO provide to scientific community including their pay, facilities and other things? – Action CC R&D (HR)
I don’t know what DRDO submitted against this question but yesterday I have received a good real analytical input from one of DRDO establishment ACEM, Nashik. Which can an eye opener for Ministry of Defence to see the real cause of DRDO failure?
Although the received letter is not having sign but as per sources all information are true and it can be verified by not from GM but from each and every officials/ employees of ACEM.
It is requested that listen the voice of young scientists although they are serving for their livelihood but same time want to contribute to nation with their full knowledge and ability but unfortunately DRDO management is rotten that the young scientists simply wasting their energy and time.
With hope our great IITan Shri Parrikar ji will this issue with honest and eligible scientists and use the scientific potential in right direction.
Regards
Prabhu Dandriyal 21-Sunderwala, Raipur, DehradunPh 0135 2787750, Mobile 9411114879,
e-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com website www.corruptionindrdo.com
Are aware there are some most successful projects of DRDO. Ushus the submarine sonar is the classical example,. The most appreciated by user but the least by the LAB. The then lab director put all his ego to kill it. He tried various means to torture the PD and members. one of the most brilliant young scientist was made to runaway by his chamchas. Director is like GOd nobody can question. This should change,
but another side corruption work done by young scientist this real story in ACEM Nasik. MTO has purchase battery charger you know the cost of this charger ? this is a sample example other was Hill Top Tower.work package of HP company etc.
The real scientists have always suffered at the hands of the society since ages especially from people who held controls. But science always prevails and the scientists are remembered by names for ages and the controllers are lost in the oblivion. Scientists do your good work and let the country be benefited.
The real scientists MTO in ACEM Nasik have always manage staff car for GM with transport allowance Admin officer making his payslip with all allowance.MTO ACEM was done big corruption work from 2009 to 2015.
All scientists in ACEM Nasik drinking wine with B.Bahttaracharyya that time this Young scientist manage hung corruption through tender some young scientist purchase a car some purchase flat in Nasik.that time they are work in ACEM plant now corruption was stop by GM so that they are against the system if youngster not want service now leave it.If government start a court of inquiry against corrupt scientist then they learn the lesson of CCS rule.
The ACEM, Nasik Should also encourage research to improve propellant production, quality, shelf-life, reliability of the systems.
Remember kakarne se kya hoga. Its our duty to challenge corruption at any stage. You can not work in a corrupt environment if you are honest. Your head will blast in such type of environment.
Set up a fair court of enquiry, all frauds would be caught. It would be clear that AO is carrying out ill office practices at ACEM. All DRDS and DRTC are being troubled by him. His shrewd rotten mind is making the environment at ACEM vicious.
Only 25 questions? There should be minimum 25 K (25,000) questions and there would be no answer. DRDO means different rules for different officers.
AO Is the main puppet, spoiling the environment of ACEM fraternity. Store officer is blamed by most of vendor asking for gift money. But who cares ????
Be ready to face the Vigilance Inquiry.First case Transport Allowance than MTO next MMD next GM.
To GM ACEM Nasik & all Scientist please read the following CVC Order. Good news for you.
The Central Vigilance Commission has been empowered vide Section 8 (1)(a) of the CVC Act, 2003 to exercise superintendence over the functioning of the Delhi Special Police Establishment (CBI) in so far as it relates to the investigation of offences alleged to have been committed under the Prevention of Corruption Act,1988 (49 of 1998) or an offence with which a public servant specified in sub-section (2) may, under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973(2 of 1974) be charged at the same trial. Further, under Section 8(1) (b) of CVC Act,2003, the Commission has been assigned the function of giving direction to the Delhi Special Police Establishment (CBI) for the purpose of discharging the responsibility entrusted to the Commission under sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (25 of 1946). In order to perform the functions as envisaged in Section 8 (1) (a) and 8 (1) (b) of the CVC Act, 2003 to review the progress of investigation conducted by the Delhi Special Police Establishment (CBI) into offences alleged to have been committed under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (49 of 1988) or the public servant may, under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), be charged at the same trial and under Section 8 (1) (f) of the CVC Act, 2003 to review the progress of applications pending with the competent authorities for sanction of prosecution under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (49 of 1988).