All India | Edited by Deepshikha Ghosh | Updated: November 25, 2014 -NDTV
Deepal Pentel, Ex VC DU
NEW DELHI:Former Delhi University vice chancellor Deepal Pental was today arrested and sent to Tihar jail on a fellow professor’s complaint. He will, however, be released soon as the High Court has stayed his arrest warrant.
A Delhi court ordered Professor Pental’s arrest on a petition by Professor P Parthasarthy, who had accused him of plagiarising his paper on biotechnology and also illegally using cobalt, a chemical substance, from the university’s science lab.
Professor Pental was arrested for the “unauthorized use of a hazardous material,” which is a non-bailable offence and carries a maximum sentence of life in jail.
Mr Pental, 63, a professor of genetics and a noted researcher, was the vice chancellor of Delhi University in 2005-2010. He is described as an expert in the field of transgenics and has reportedly published more than 60 research papers. He has also received many awards, including one from France.
To 6th October 2014
Shri K K Singh, IDAS,
Addl.CDA, CPIO,
O/o PCDA (R&D), West Block-V,
R K PURAM,
NEW DELHI- 110066
Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 in respect of concurrence of Ministry of Defence (Integrated Finance R&D) ID No. 1384/IF (R&D)/2006 dated 1st June 2006.
Provide the certified copy of concurrence of Ministry of Defence (Integrated Finance R&D) ID No. 1384/ IF (R&D)/2006 dated 1st June 2006.
Name competent authority of issuing above concurrence by Integrated Finance R&D.
Ministry of Finance approval for issuing above said concurrence by Integrated Finance R&D.
Copy of request/ proposal of DRDO on which concurrence was given by Ministry of Defence (Integrated Finance R&D).
Whether this concurrence was given by Ministry of Defence (Integrated Finance R&D) to DRDO only for individuals promoted on 2006 as Technical Officer -D (Yes/No)
To 6th October 2014
Hon’ble
Shri Narendra Modi,
Prime Minister of India,
Room N0 -152, PMO, South Block,
New Delhi-110011
SUBJECT: DEEMED SUSPENSION OF DR. G. MALKONDIAH, DS AND CCR&D (HR), DRDO AS under the provisions of Rule 10(2)(b) of CCS(CCA) Rules 1965
Hon’ble Sir,
Hon’ble Madras High Court Judgment dated 24 Sept 2014 in Contempt Petition No.1711 of 2012 inW.P.No.13067 of 2005 and Sub Appln.No.602 of 2012 in which Dr. G Malkondiah, Distinguished Scientist and Chief Controller Research & Development (HR & TM) was one of the respondents. By the order dated 24 Sept 2014, Hon’ble Court pronounced following order:
Para 40 of judgement – Therefore, we propose to impose punishment of sentence of imprisonment onthe respondents 2 and 3 for their wilful disobedience of this Court’s order. In the facts of this case, we feel that merely imposing fine on the second and third respondents would be inadequate and ends of justice would be served, only if they are awarded imprisonment and fine.
Para 41 of judgement – In the result, respondents 2 and 3 are held guilty for civil contemptunder Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and they are punished with Simple Imprisonment for a period of three weeks and also pay a fine ofRs.2,000/- each personally.The Government is directed to take appropriate departmental action against them for the reckless negligence and wilful disobedience of the orders of this Court, which lead to insurmountable sufferingsfor the petitioner for more than a decade.
Para 42 of judgement – The contemnors are directed to surrender for undergoing the punishment of imprisonment within one week from today, failing which the Registry is directed to issue warrant of commitment to prison for undergoing the sentence imposed upon them.
Para 43 of judgement- By this order, the issue has not come to an end and the liability ofthe petitioners/contemnors in W.P.No.13067 of 2005 to comply with the orderdated 30.04.2009, does not abate. Therefore, they are directed to comply with the order forthwith.
Dr. G. Malkondiah has been punished with simple imprisonment for a period of three weeks and also pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-. Therefore Dr. G. Malkondiah, CCR&D (HR&TM) has been convicted by Hon’ble Madras High Court for civil contempt under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Hon’ble Madras High Court stated in their order “A sleeping man can be woken, but not a man who pretends to sleep. Here the Contemnors belong to the latter category and they can never be woken up unless orders in this Contempt Application are passed. Therefore, we hold that the second and thirds respondents have wilfully committed contempt of the order of this Court dated 30.04.2009 in W.P.No.13067 of 2005 as affirmed by the Hon’ble Apex Court”.
Provisions of Rule 10.(2)(b) of CCS(CCA) Rules 1965 reproduced here for ready reference:
(2) A Government servant shall be deemed to have been placed under suspension by an order of appointing authority –
(a) with effect from the date of his detention, if he is detained in custody, whether on a criminal charge or otherwise, for a period exceeding forty-eight hours;
(b) with effect from the date of his conviction, if, in the event of a conviction for an offence, he is sentenced to a term of imprisonment exceeding forty-eight hours and is not forthwith dismissed or removed or compulsorily retired consequent to such conviction.
Provisions of Rule 10(5)(a) CCS(CCA) Rules 1965 reproduced here for ready reference:
(5)(a) An order of suspension made or deemed to have been made under this rule shallcontinue to remain in force until it is modified or revoked by the authoritycompetent to do so.
Therefore, under the provisions of Rule 10(2)(b) , Dr. G. Malkondiah is now under deemed suspension wef 24.09.2014 and his deemed suspension shall remain continued until it is modified or revoked by the authority competent to do so.
The formal orders of deemed suspension has not been issued till date by the authority competent to do so in MOD and he is continue as CCR&D(HR&TM).
Vide [G.I. , MHA, Letter No. 39/72/51-Ests., dated the 23rd October 1951] and [G.I. , MHA, O.M. No. 25/70/49-Ests., dated the 26th December, 1949], conviction of Government servants to be promptly communicated to administrative authorities. Whether Dr. G Malkondiah has informed to authority competent so about his conviction or not, is matter of investigation by the competent authority, if not then it will be regarded as suppression of material information and will render him liable to disciplinary action on this ground alone.
Under the provisions of Rule 19(i) of CCS (CCA) Rules 1965, the authority competent to do so in case of Dr. G. Malkondiah, should take necessary action as per rules.
Dr. G. Malkondiah challenged the said order dated 24.09.2014 of Hon’ble Madras High Court in Hon’ble Supreme Court vide civil appeal D No. 31977/2014dated 25 Sept 2014.
The hearing of the civil appeal D No. 31977/2014 along with civil appeal D No. 31978/2014 took place at Hon’ble Supreme Court on 26.09.2014 and Hon’ble Supreme Court stayed the order dated 24.09.2014 of Hon’ble Madras High Court in contempt petition no. 1711/2012.
Dr. G. Malkondiah knowingly victimizing & mentally torturing the employee of minority community since past ten years by misusing his official position and deliberately disobeying the Court orders. Hon’ble Madras High Court makes comment on his act as “wilful disobedience of Court orders “. This act of Dr. G. Malkondiah is of moral turpitude and should not be ignored by authority competent to do so.
Dr. G. Malkondiah, Distinguished Scientist, took over as Chief Controller R&D (HR) at DRDO HQ on January 01, 2013. As matter of fact Directorate of Personnel (DOP) report to CCR&D (HR) and all legal matters of DRDO be taken care by DOP under CCR&D (HR). Thereby Dr. G. Malkondiah misused his official position to satisfy his ego by contemning the Hon’ble Court order and on the other hand victimizing the man of minority community who was unemployed since the year 2004. Thereby Dr. G. Malkondiah wasted lakhs of rupees from public fund in fighting the cases from Hon’ble Tribunal to Hon’ble Supreme Court since 2004 to 2014.
Therefore, in light of the facts stated above suitable disciplinary action may kindly be initiated by Government against Dr. G. Malkondiah, CCR&D(HR&TM), DRDO and he should be placed under deemed suspension by written order by the competent authority so that justice and rule of law could be establish in DRDO.
GOI OM 23 October 1951 under Rule 19 of CCS(CCA) Rules 1965
SC order dated 25.09.2014
SC order dated 26.09.2014ITEM NO.56 COURT NO.4 SECTION XII
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Civil Appeal Diary No(s). 31977/2014
G MALAKONDIAH Appellant(s)
VERSUS
S. JOSEPH RAJ AND ORS
Respondent(s)
(with appln. (s) for exemption from filing c/copy as well as plain copy of the impugned order and permission to file appeal. And office report)
WITH C.A. D 31978/2014
(With appln.(s) for exemption from filing c/copy as well as plain copy of the impugned order and appln.(s) for permission to file appeal. and Office Report)
Date : 26/09/2014 This appeal was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAFULLA CHANDRA PANT
For Appellant(s)Mr. Mukul Rohtagi, AG
Mr. R. Bala, Adv.
Mr. R.K. Verma, Adv.
Mr. B. V. Balaram Das,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. V. Balaji,Adv.
Mr. Asai Thambi, Adv.
Mr. Rakesh K. Sharma, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Permission to file appeal is granted.Perused the photocopy of the certified copy of the order dated 24.09.2014 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Signature Not Verified Judicature at Madras in Contempt Petition No. 1711 of 2012.
Digitally signed by
Rajni Mukhi
Date: 2014.09.29
12:12:10 IST
Reason: Petitioner is allowed two weeks’ time to file affidavit enclosing the copy of the said order.
Notice be issued on respondents returnable within four weeks. Dasti, in addition, is permitted.
Mr. Rakesh K. Sharma, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of Respondent No.1. He may file counter affidavit within three weeks. Rejoinder Affidavit, if any, be filed within a week thereafter.
In the meantime, the order dated 24 th September, 2014 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Contempt Petition No. 1711/2012 arising out of Writ Petition No. 13067/2005 and sub Application No. 602 of 2012 shall remain stayed.
To 26th September 2014
Sh Subandhu Basu,
US (SM-I), CPIO,
Room no. 23, North Block,
New Delhi -110001
Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in respect of OFFICE MEMORANDUM F.No.22/35/2011-EO (SM.II) 24th September, 2014 Sub: Grant of extension/re-employment to Central Government servants beyond the age of superannuation. In Para 1 – The ACC has observed that in some of the cases, the Departments are not taking timely action to reconstitute the Departmental Peer Review Committee (DPRC) and are unilaterally extending the service of the officers beyond the age of superannuation without first obtaining approval of the ACC.
Provide the name of officials and name of their respective departments who were get extension in service beyond superannuation for two years without first obtaining approval of the ACC from January 2011 to till date as mentioned in above OM
Provide the name of officials and name of their respective departments who were get extension in service after 62 to 64 years without first obtaining approval of the ACC from January 2011 to till date as mentioned in above OM.
Provide the total number of DRDO officials granted extension for two years 60 to 62 years from January 2010 to till date.
Provide the total number of DRDO officials granted extension for two years 62 to 64 years from January 2010 to till date.
To, 17th September 2014
Dr. RB Sharma, CPIO,
DRDO HQ, Min. of Defence,
DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg,
New Delhi-110011
Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in respect selection proceeding of Director Quality, Reliability & Safety (QRS) in DRDO Hqrs.
Directorate of Quality, Reliability & Safety (QRS) has been created at DRDO HQ, New Delhi vide Govt. of India, MOD letter (NS&M)/QARS/C/M/01/2638/D(R&D) dated 27th September 2012.
RAC issued Advt. No. 110/December 2012 for recruitment of 01 Scientist G with Discipline Mechanical Engg. & Experience in the Quality, Reliability and Safety.
Letter No. DOP/11/110059/QRSM/M/02 dated 14 August 2013 of Directorate of Personnel, DRDO, MOD, New Delhi on the Subject- Appointment of Director, QRS, DRDO HQ, New Delhi.
RAC issued Advt No. 112/ October 2013 for recruitment of 01 Scientist G for DQRS, DRDO with Essential Qualification: At least First class Bachelor’s Degree in Engg./Technology in Mechanical Engg./Aeronautical Engg./ Electrical Engg./ Electronics & Communication Engg. only and Experience: At least 15 years’ experience in areas of quality planning, quality assurance, quality control, and quality improvements.
Recruitment of Sri Saroj Kumar Patel as Scientist G in DRDO against Advt No. 112/October 2013 in March 2014 at seniority no. 486 who joined DRDO on 27 March 2014.
Appointment of Sri Saroj Kumar Patel, Scientist G as Director, Directorate Quality, Reliability & Safety (QRS) with effect from 31 March 2014 vide order No. DOP/05/53269/DQR&S/M/02 dated 31 March 2014.
Kindly provide following information under Section 6 of RTI Act 2005.
The total number of applications received by DOP/DRDO HQ against the letter of DOP dated 14 August 2013 mentioned above at point (iii) and number of candidates appeared in interview/screening for the said post.
Whether any Scientist G serving in DRDO was found suitable for post of Director, DQRS.(Yes/No)
If yes then provide his details like name, seniority & establishment.
File noting for appointment of Sri Saroj Kumar Patel, Scientist G as Director, DQRS, DRDO HQ, New Delhi.
Whether any other names were considered for post of Director, DQRS, DRDO HQ in March 2014 by DRDO.(Yes/No)
If yes then provide the names of Scientist G that were considered along with Sri Saroj Kumar Patel, Scientist G.
“The abuse/misuse of power for personal gain is corruption”. The information sought in this RTI Application pertains to allegations of corruption and as such not exempted u/s 24(1) of the RTI Act 2005.
Regards
Prabhu Dandriyal,
21-Sunderwala, Raipur,
Phone 0135- 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,
e-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com website www.corruptionindrdo.comRegistration Number MODEF/R/2014/61705
सेवामेंमाननीयश्रीनरेंद्रमोदीजीदिनाक 10 सितम्बर 2014प्रधानमंत्रीकक्ष संख्या 152पीएमओसाउथब्लाकनईदिल्ली -110011
विषय : डी आर डी ओ द्वारा आर टी आई 2005 एक्ट की खुलेआम अवलेहना
श्रीमान
डी आर डी ओ द्वारा आर टी आई 2005 एक्ट की खुलेआम अवलेहना हो रही है। यह एक्ट में स्पष्ट रूप से लिखा है कि एक्ट की सेक्शन 24 के तहत डी आर डी ओ को सूचना के अधिकार नियम 2005 में छूट प्रदान की गयी है। परन्तु यह छूट भ्रष्टाचार और मानव अधिकार उल्लंघन के मामलों में नहीं है।
पर यह खेद का विषय है कि डी आर डी ओ द्वारा भ्रष्टाचार और मानव अधिकार उल्लंघन के मामलों में किसी भी प्रकार से सूचना नहीं दी जा रही है।
इसका मुख्य कारण यह है की पिछले कुछ वर्षो में सूचना के अधिकार नियम 2005 के तहत मांगी गयी सूचनाओं के आधार पर डी आर डी ओ के कई वरिष्ठ अधिकारियो को विभिन्न अनुशासनात्मक कार्यवाहियो का सामना करना पद रहा है। जैसे की एक वरिष्ठ अधिकारी श्रीमती टी चन्द्रा बानू, साइंटिस्ट ऍफ़ को गलत तरीके से पायी गयी सर्विस से 18 जून 2014 हाथ धोना पड़ा।
डा अरुण कुमार पर्सनल डायरेक्टर को सेवानिविर्ती से दो घंटे पहले निलंबित होना पड़ा व् अब डिसिप्लिनरी एक्शन का सामना कर रहे है। डा वीरभद्रपा, डा ए के त्यागी व् अन्य बहुत से अधिकारियों के खिलाफ कई स्तरों की जाँच चल रही है।
करीब डेढ़ दर्जन मामलों सी वी सी व् विजिलेंस में जाँच चल रही है। सी बी आई में भी कई मामलें लंबित है।
श्रीमान यह आर टी आई 2005 एक्ट के कारण ही इन भ्रष्टाचारो का खुलासा संभव हो पाया है।
परन्तु इन सब कार्यवाहियो को देखते हुये डी आर डी ओ अधिकारियो ने यह तय कर लिया है की अब किसी प्रकार से कितने ही भ्रष्टाचारो के सबूत भी लगे हो तो भी आर टी आई एप्लिकेंट को कोई भी सूचना प्रदान नहीं करनी है।
इसके लिए सूचना अधिकारी डी आर डी ओ ने सभी लैब ओ संस्थानों को 8 मई 2014 व् 11 अगस्त 2014 को इस सन्दर्भ में निर्देश दिए है। यह सरासर देश के संविधान के प्रति अवहेलना है। (छाया प्रति सलग्न है।)
श्रीमान, देश के सतर्क नागरिक आपकी कार्य प्रणाली से काफी आशाविंत है कि आप देश को भ्रष्टाचार से मुक्त कराएँगे और देश के सतर्क नागरिक आपके इस यज्ञ में आर टी आई 2005 एक्ट के माध्यम से आपका सहयोग करेंगे। परन्तु ये तभी संभव है जब आप इन सभी अधिकारियो को निर्देश देंगे कि भर्ष्ट अधिकारियो को बचाने के लिए आर टी आई 2005 एक्ट का उल्लघन व् अवलेहना न करे।
To, 26th July 2014
Dr. RB Sharma, CPIO
DRDO HQ, Min. of Defence
DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg
New Delhi-110011
Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in respect of M/s Jangid Construction, RZF 40, Street No. 40, Sadh Nagar Part II, New Delhi 45. It is observed Dr Vijay Veer, Director, DRL, Tezpur giving undue favor to M/s Jangid Construction ignoring the guidelines providing in DRDO purchase manual 2005.
M/s Jangid Construction constructed Entomology Building in DRDE, Gwalior under supervision of Dr Vijay Veer and this old connection now continue in DRL, Tezpur. The all construction / renovation job of DRL, Tezpur are supposed to come under CCE(east) but it is observed all such work are given to M/s Jangid Construction with support sleeping firms. Most of cases are raised with following firms which itself the corruption evidence.
i) M/s Jangid Construction, RZF 40, Street No. 40, Sadh Nagar Part II, New Delhi 45.
ii) M/s Balaji Construction Co, Dwarka, Delhi 75
iii) M/s Kushi Enterprises, West Patel Nagar, Delhi 08
iv) M/s Bhagwati Enterprises, Shiv Block, Delhi 45
v) M/s MRN Group, New Delhi 40
vi) M/s M K Decorator, Palam Colony, Delhi 30
In most of the cases scientists of DRL, Tezpur split their demand so it can be execute through limited tenders with above firms, who is the boss ?
Provide the supply order of M/s Jangid Construction for Entomology Building, DRDE.
Provide the copy of all supply orders of M/s Jangid Construction in respect of DRL, Tezpur.
Note: the requested information is not come under exemption of schedule –II of RTI Act 2005. Since, March 2014 end DRDO stopped to provide information under shadow of exemption. It is requested in above para-one of this request it is clear cut mentioned the corruption/ favoritism/ abuse of power, so before denial of information your point wise explanation is required that the matter not pertain under corruption.
To, 26th July 2014
Dr. RB Sharma, CPIO
DRDO HQ, Min. of Defence
DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg
New Delhi-110011
Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in respect of Ms Sweta Singh, JRF, Pharma Tech Division, DRL, Tezpur.
She joined 3/10/2011 and doing PhD from Gauhati University and drawing fellowship @ 16000/month. She was absent from January 2013 to Febuary 2014 but it was observed that in this duration she continuously received fellowship amount. Her fellowship was extended for one year from 3/10/2013. After one RTI request against this illegal favor, Ms Sweta Singh returned an amount of Rs 17600.00 through cheque no 508551 dated 8/5/2014 in response of letter no 51/13/AE dated 28/10/2013.
Provide the total amount of fellowship given to Ms Sweta Singh, JRF, DRL, Tezpur
Provide the total days of present of Ms Sweta Singh, JRF, at DRL, Tezpur
Provide the proceeding noting of extension of fellowship after 3/10/2013 and copy of approval from HRD, DRDO
Provide the certify copy of DRL letter no 51/13/AE dated 28/10/2013.
Note: the requested information is not come under exemption of schedule –II of RTI Act 2005. Since, March 2014 end DRDO stopped to provide information under shadow of exemption. It is requested in above para-one of this request it is clear cut mentioned the corruption/ favoritism/ abuse of power, so before denial of information your point wise explanation is required that the matter not pertain under corruption. The above JRF sanction is preview of HRD, DRDO Hqrs.
To 5th July 2014Sh A. M. Manichan,Under Secretary (IC-IV), CPIO,Ministry of Defence,Department of Defence,Sena Bhavan, New Delhi
Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 in respect of UNSTARRED Lok Sabha QUESTION NO 2583 of asked by Honorable members Shri RUDRAMADHAB RAY, Shri MANICKA TAGORE.
Question – whether DRDO has developed a kit to instantly identify explosive typically used in bomb blasts and plans to sell the explosive detector in USA
ANSWER
MINISTER OF DEFENCE (SHRI A.K. ANTONY)
Yes, Madam. Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has developed Explosive Detection Kit (EDK) capable of detecting and identifying explosives commonly used for destructive purposes. The kit was launched by a US Company, Crowe & Co. On 2nd August, 2013. DRDO has granted a license on non-exclusive basis to sell EDK in countries other than India and on exclusive basis for manufacture & sales in US..
Please provide the complete certified copy of papers supplied by DRDO to MINISTER OF DEFENCE SHRI A.K. ANTONY against above question.
Please provide the annexure supplied to Honorable MINISTER OF DEFENCE (SHRI A.K. ANTONY) by DRDO regarding US Company, Crowe & Co
DRDO RTI Cell is acting as a blind body. Since RTI Act, 2005’s implementation, DRDO felt its power and put all efforts to get rid off but success was partial, Schedule – II exemption did not include the corruption and Human rights allegations and subsequently CIC also gave guidelines that, day to day administration and management matters are also not exempted.
This CIC supports give honest officials and citizen an immense power to fight against neck deep corruption/nepotism/favoritism prevailing in DRDO.
Cases started to expose the corrupt practice of senior DRDO officials in various matters like recruitment/promotions/procurements, etc and action started against corrupt officials by Defence Minister, CVO, CVC, etc
The DRDO management now come under desperation and looking after to fix those who are trying to expose the corrupt senior officers, few terminated/dismissed, few transferred, few deprived with promotions, a message was passed among the DRDO officials/employees, that if any one seeks RTI, he should be ready to face consequences and it is established that facts that DRDO management extensively used unwritten policy not give promotions or due credits to those who are involved in RTI acts practices.
It is a clear cut message to the nation that DRDO top management is a dishonest corrupt and not working in the interest of the nation because it is not committed towards the constitution of India.
On 8th March 2014, Dr. R B Sharma, CPIO, DRDO Hqrs acted as a super boss and sent a letter to all Labs/ Establishments of DRDO to not give any information under RTI Act, 2005.
On 28thMay, 2005 a meeting was held under DRDO transparency officer Dr. Sudershan Kumar, DS and CC R&D (PC & SI). In that he told to all DRDO’s CPIO not to supply any information under RTI Act-2005. It can be verified by records of DRDO’s RTI cell that no information was passed after this decision to any RTI applicant.
That all RTI applicants receiving reply in the same format which was supplied by DRDO RTI Cell and First appellate authority reply was also given by DRDO in same format.
Surprisingly the following case of Dr. R G Taware, Ex- Technical Officer ‘B’ was to show the blind act of DRDO’s RTI cell.
Dr. R G Taware, Ex- Technical Officer ‘B’ was illegally dismissed by DRDO management with conspiracy. The conspiracy was proved by single point DRDO used then RRM, Sh Palam Raju for suspension and after dismissal and material fact is that RRM, Sh Palam Raju nor has the power for such approval, because as per Ministry of Defence orders of power delegation by Defence Minster shows he has never delegated such powers to RRM, Sh. Palam Raju specially for DRDO.
Dr. R G Taware, Ex- Technical Officer ‘B’ suspension /dismissal orders one of major allegation was “The tone and tenor of letter of Dr. R G Taware dated 26 Aug 2009”
Dr. R G Taware send an RTI request to CPIO, HEMRL, Pune, information sought that DRDO scientists developed a machine which can measure “The tone and tenor of any letter”, he asked whether scientist got any award and promotions for this great innovation.
The Blind DRDO RTI cell replied in a standard format “ You hereby inform that DRDO is placed in second schedule of RTI Act and exempted from disclosure of Information under Section 24 (1) exceptpertaining to the allegation of corruption and human right violations”( copy enclosed)
Further after getting above reply from BLIND DRDO RTI Cell, Dr. R G Taware sent first appeal to FAA, DRDO to check their IQ.
Interestingly the height of blindness of DRDO RTI cell or to hell with RTI same standard reply send by FAA on the issue that “You hereby inform that DRDO is placed in second schedule of RTI Act and exempted from disclosure of Information under Section 24 (1) exceptpertaining to the allegation of corruption and human right violations” (copy enclosed)
Great DRDO RTI cell proved their scientific capability in this RTI application replies – can the common Indian believe these DRDO scientists caliber for defence preparedness ??????????????
Dr R G Tawere’s RTI applicationCPIO, HEMRL, Pune’s ReplyRG Taware’s RTI first appeal Page 1RG Taware RTI first appeal page 2
Appeal to clean DRDO of corrupt and anti-national officials
