Tag Archives: 2010

Drdo

MASSIVE CORRUPTION IN AIRFORCE UNDERGROUND STRUCTURE, IMPLEMENTATION AGENCY DEFENCE PSU BHARAT ELECTRONICS SUSPENDS ITS OWN INVESTIGATING OFFICERS FOR UNEARTHING ROLE OF CMD & TOP OFFICERS

Leave a comment

To.                                                                                           3rd June 2019

Shri Rajnath Singh Ji

104.  South Block

New Delhi – 110011

Dear Sir,

Congratulations for great victory and taking charge of big responsibility of Defence Ministry.

MASSIVE CORRUPTION IN AIRFORCE UNDERGROUND STRUCTURE, IMPLEMENTATION AGENCY DEFENCE PSU BHARAT ELECTRONICS SUSPENDS ITS OWN INVESTIGATING OFFICERS FOR UNEARTHING ROLE OF CMD & TOP OFFICERS

In an unprecedented move the defence public sector undertaking Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL) has suspended three senior officials, who unearthed massive irregularities in the Indian Air Force’s confidential IACCS project- underground bunkers- at 10 strategic locations. The three officials were part of Inquiry committee set up by the BEL’s Chief Vigilance officer (CVO) in July 2018 . The team exposing the role of high ranking officers and manipulation of awards of contracts in Rs.8000 Crore project had submitted the report in October 2018. Instead of taking action against the corrupt officers, BEL management led by its Chairman MV Gowtama, who himself is under the scanner in IACCS project, acted with vengeance and suspended the investigation team members.

It is pertinent to mention that after three-member probe committee submitted the report, BEL CVO , a senior IAS officer MR S.SHIVA KUMAR  1987 BATCH in his note dated 29 March 2019 exposed the deep-rooted corruption recommending strong action against erring officers and firms. Yet, the CMD , who is likely to be arrested if a probe is ordered, cracked the whip against inquiry committee members for doing honest job. This crackdown is in spite of  the fact that the CVO of the company as appointed by CVC of India had established and validated each point of the investigation report  and strongly recommended to management of BEL for immediate police and civil criminal action against concerned BEL officers and chief consultant of the project M/s RD KONSULTANT.  The role of senior DRDO officers is also under the scanner since it was DRDO which recommended and fully supported the name of RD Konsultant to BEL although it was done informally and BEL surreptitiously avoided DRDO role in the files. The role of DRDO officers was brought out and exposed by the BEL vigilance probe team which was suspended on 17 May 2019.  To distract the government’s IB report, CMD, BEL created suspension drama of three personal of BEL, 2 GM Vigilance and one manager to fooling the country. This shows the clear mockery of BEL management.

M/S RD KONSULTANT – DELHI  , which came out to be a shell company in investigation report , incorporated just 3-4 months before the award of PPR consultancy project with all false  and fabricated documents, and was wrongly  awarded DPR consultancy project also violating BEL own manual procedures as well CVC guidelines with a criminal intent of having control over all future activities of civil contract as well infrastructure/ Plant and machinery  items procurement worth more than Rs 3500 crores, as recorded in noting files  and  many senior management personals of M/S BHARAT ELECTRONICS , which is continuously being done since UPA CONGRESS REGIME 2011.

One very interesting fact of the whole case is that the two BHARAT ELECTRONICS senior management personals named Mr N.K. SHARMA DIRECTOR( MARKETTING) and MR CHANDERPRAKASH EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (D&E) GAD, who were the chief &key persons for co ordinating the IACCS project getting approved from Indian air force, joined  a company named “OIS ADVANCE TECH” – 90% OWNDED BY MR SANJAY BHANDARI – famous arms dealer & power broker  and close associate of ROBERT WADRA immediately after their retirement from BEL in 2010 and 2011, and immediately after this this project got formally started by BEL . 

The detailed and very exhaustive investigation done by fact verification team in early 2018 and further investigation team in end 2018 and subsequently report by CVO of M/s Bharat Electronics has established the details of  massive corruption and mal practices done by M/S RD Konsultant, its associate/related firms and senior management persons of BEL  ( since 2011 onwards till now), by abusing their powers and violating all BEL manuals as well as documented CVC guidelines for tendering for award of civil project works and procurement of items worth more than 3500 crores.

These civil contract worth more than 1000 crores have been given of paper to reputed firms like M/S L&T but at almost 30 % higher and inflated rates (as also mentioned by then Director (Finance) Mr PRABHAT ACHARYA in file noting about more than 100 crore loss as well as violation of BEL Contract manual conditions as well as CVC guidelines) and after some period he resigned from company. After this project given to m/s L&T are being done by M/S RD consultant sister concern named M/S CS CONSTRUCTIONS at sites ( even MD- Mr Rahul Baucher  of M/S CS Construction used to come to BEL-Ghaziabad unit  for regular review meeting on behalf of L&T) – A serious violation of CVC  guidelines as well contract conditions of BEL & M/S RD KONSUL) , which seriously compromise the quality , as it is a very small petty company which in no way  has a technical capability and skill to deal such highly technical and secured project. This fact as validated by the fact that some sites were shown as collapsed during construction and crores of rupees were further approved by BEL management in name of deviation with fixing the responsibility on contractor.

The detailed design which was submitted by M/s R.D. Konsultants specified vendors for all the sub-systems which are used in the blast proof underground buildings. It is seen that these vendors are the same which they had brought out to be their partners during presented made by then during the Pre-qualification bid. The Order which was placed on BEL by Air Force was also based on the detail design report submitted by M/s R.D. Konsultants and hence all these vendors called in the order from Air Force were the same which were defined by M/s R.D. Konsultants.BEL has in turn placed many orders for the sub-systems based on the vendors defined by M/s R.D. Konsultants. A visit was made to the works of many of these European vendors by a team of engineers from BEL along with Air Force personnel. But is it said that the team was accompanied by a rep from M/s R.D. Konsultant and the visit was coordinated by M/s R. D. Konsultant. These foreign companies were allowed to supply materials on a single tender basis by the BEL chairman MV Gowtama. He in fact overruled his own officials and approved qualification of several firms despite they had failed to submit bid details during prescribed time. Such gross violation was similar to the ones seen during 2G scam. BEL Chairman violated the laid down norms by allowing these foreign firms despite objections duly recorded by the finance division.

All above shows a case of massive corruption, fraud and abuse of power with criminal intent and a huge loss to Government public money by BEL senior management persons in connivance with chief consultant, EX DRDO and some IAF officials. The whole investigation report findings are finally found true of the fact that as it is learnt from top BEL & DRDO sources last week M/s RD Konsultant has written to BEL MANAGEMENT that as his chief designer has left the company and now on this bogus consultancy company’s  design, specifications and whole scheme of the project BEL management has already  spend thousands of crores of public money  and suppose its design does not work then who will own the responsibility of whole scam. Now the news that the firm M/S RD KONSULTANT is running out of project the reason could only be because his fraud has come out in media and BEL current management instead of taking legal action against the corrupt, trying to harass and victimize the honest and brave investigation team members ( in name of media leak- which even our prime minister call  as a strong pillar of democracy) .

The team which is suspended and currently facing all type of harassment, victimization and humiliation of suspension, but in spite of all pressures and threats, have unearthed this scam just to keep the spirit of national security and defence importance   and demand only for justice but calling for a detailed CVC/CBI/ED enquiry outside BEL management preview immediately and immediate intervention of MINISTRY OF DEFENCE for action on some BEL senior management for their misdeeds

A honest and sincere appeal to all  concerned officials of PMO/MOD /CVC/PRESS/JUDITARY that please take immediate action in this regard to keep “CHOKIDAR “ alive in our souls  by safeguarding the honour of investigation team officials.

ABOVE ALL MATTER IS COVERED IN DETAILS BY  A REPUTED NEWPAPER

“FIRSTPOST”  IN ITS ARTICLE DATED 02 APRIL, 09 APRIL & 26 April 2019

Before publishing in media the matter was available with AF Intelligence, CVO, CBI, North Block, Chairman, DRDO, IB in March itself but god knows why any agency not take-up this matter seriously.

Hope you will take up matter seriously as you are responsible Chairperson, Audit Committee of BEL and may be aware of all developments from side of BEL management who are posing that matter is mare deviation of 50/60 lakhs as a bonafide fighter against defence corruption since more than 20 years I am fully aware of nexus. This nexus was designed by Retired Scientist of DRDO with ex DRDO chief because the U/G work of services was sole right of DRDO via SPIC, but when retirement stage these corrupt DRDO official gang create the scene and diverted this activity to BEL which doesn’t have any type construction division like DRDO have, U/G plant machinery experience either trading nor manufacturing in this tender only 500 cr electronics involvement can BEL claimed. As per investigation and observation it is clearly visualize that few greedy BEL official trapped in vicious DRDO official and for sake of few bucks they compromised with national security as well as their organization’s dignity. Please ask the vigilance report prepared by these three suspended BEL employees, Report is not an eye opener but will help govern to expose UPA era nexus who are responsible to siphon the defence budget under shadow of secrecy. 

Regards

Prabhu Dandriyal,

21-Sunderwala, Raipur,

Dehradun-248008

Phone – 0135-2787750 | Mobile – 9411114879

Email – prabhudoon@gmail.com | website – www.corruptionindrdo.com

Drdo

3,600 Crores Later, Made-In-India Akash Missile Fails Tests, Says Auditor

Leave a comment

The Akash and its newer variant, the Akash Mk-2, are a medium-range surface-to-air missile system designed to intercept enemy aircraft and missiles at a distance of 18-30 km.
All India | Written by Vishnu Som | Updated: July 28, 2017 18:41 IST NDTV

The Akash was produced by the state-run Bharat Electronics.

NEW DELHI: As many as a third of the home-made Akash surface-to-air missiles have failed basic tests, says the country’s national auditor, claiming the deficiencies of the missiles “posed an operational risk during hostilities.”

The report of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) is a big setback for the Make-In-India initiative which seeks to reduce India’s dependence on imported arms. The report, given to parliament, says, “the missiles fell short of the target, had lower than the required velocity, and there was malfunctioning of critical units.”

The Air Force has refused to comment on the report.

The Akash was produced by the state-run Bharat Electronics. The auditor says that though 3,600 crores have been paid to the manufacturer, none of the missile systems are installed at the six designated sites even though it has been seven years since the contract was signed.

The Akash and its newer variant, the Akash Mk-2, are a medium-range surface-to-air missile system designed to intercept enemy aircraft and missiles at a distance of 18-30 km. Tested extensively by the Indian Air Force, the Akash, which was first handed over in December 2008, was seen as a breakthrough indigenous system and in 2010, an additional six squadrons were ordered.

These additional squadrons, composed of missile launchers, radars, associated vehicles and hundreds of Akash missiles, were meant to be deployed at six air force bases in the East for which the government approved related infrastructure including storage facilities, workshops and ramp structures. These were supposed to be constructed by Bharat Electronics on a turnkey basis at a cost of approximately 100 crores. However, this infrastructure “could not be completed till October 2016 at any of the sites.” The auditor also says though work was nearly complete at two bases, the “IAF had not taken over these buildings because of defects in the construction, which rendered them unsuitable for strategic missile system storage. In other stations, the progress was below 45 per cent as of October 2016”.

While the missiles were indeed delivered to air forces bases between April 2014 and June 2016 after a delay of between 6 and 18 months, the missiles were found to be deficient in quality. According to the auditor, “Out of 80 missiles received upto November 2014, 20 missiles were test fired during April-November 2014. 6 of these missiles, ie, 30 per cent, failed the test.”

Drdo

Anomaly claim in DIAT recruitment

Leave a comment

Mohammed Akhef | TNN | Updated: Oct 1, 2016,
toi-1-oct-2016AURANGABAD: A city-based associate professor has sent a fresh complaint to the defence ministry alleging discrimination during a recruitment process by Defence Institute of Advanced Technology (DIAT) in Pune.
In support of his claim, the associate professor has attached a bunch of “self-contradictory” documents from the DIAT received under the RTI Act. The DIAT – a deemed university funded by the defence ministry – had published an advertisement on April 25, 2015, inviting applications for the post of assistant professor in the technology management. It received as many as 18 applications.
In an RTI reply, the DIAT clearly stated that the scrutiny committee shortlisted nine applicants – all holding a postgraduate degree in management. Subsequently, the shortlisted candidates were called for an interview on September 12, 2015. The interview was attended by all the shortlisted candidates, following which one was provisionally selected and his name was published on DIAT’s website on the same night.
Unconvinced with the selection, the Aurangabad-based associate professor, Dr Nitin Untwal, challenged the decision of the selection committee and sent a letter to the DIAT, claiming that the appointment was in violation of the University Grant Commission norms. Untwal holds an MBA, MCom, PhD and has cleared UGC SET.
Taking cognisance of Untwal’s letter, the National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC) has initiated a probe into the recruitment as the seat was reserved for an OBC candidate. Untwal has also lodged a series of complaints with the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO). The PMO, in its reply, cited a Supreme Court judgment in the case between one P Sushila and UGC for carrying out the recruitment process.
According to Untwal’s complaint, out of the 18 applicants, nine were disqualified on the grounds that they did not have a PG or a master’s degree in management. He added that eventually a candidate with an M-Tech degree was not only shortlisted, but selected.
Moreover, an RTI query with the National Institute of Technology in Calicut revealed that M-Tech under mechanical engineering (industrial engineering and management) is not equivalent to postgraduation in management.
In a fresh complaint, Untwal cited that a letter sent by the DIAT to the UGC – a copy which has been obtained under RTI on September 28, 2015 – the DIAT stated that the essential qualification for the post were as per para 4.4.5 of the UGC regulation 2010, which is a post graduate degree in management declared equivalent by AICTE/AIU.
In its RTI reply, the DIAT on May 23, 2016 stated that the essential qualification for the position were as per para 4.4.6.1 of the UGC regulation 2010, which says that “the essential qualification for the post is a postgraduate degree in engineering and technology”.
When contacted, DIAT officials refused to comment. But in a reply to a query posed via email, DIAT’s joint registrar (administration) T V Ananthasubramanian said, “I am directed to forward the following as our response: Dr Untwal was a candidate for the position of assistant professor for technology management. He was not found suitable by the duly constituted Selection committee and hence, not selected. His various queries to DIAT and various other agencies and authorities, including the Hon’ble Raksha Mantri/Chancellor, DIAT have been replied. The DIAT has nothing more to add to the answers given earlier.”

toi-pune-oct-2016

Drdo

After Agusta cloud, Embraer deal under scanner

Leave a comment

NEW DELHI, September 10, 2016 – THE HINDU

Brazilian aircraft major Embraer is alleged to have resorted to bribes, used middlemen to secure contracts.

Brazilian aircraft major Embraer is alleged to have resorted to bribes and used middlemen to secure contracts in India and Saudi Arabia. In India’s case, the payoff was done to a United Kingdom-based middleman in the deal for three Embraer aircraft ordered by the Defence Research and Development Organisation for building indigenous Airborne Early-Warning and Control Systems aircraft for the Indian Air Force.
Brazilian aircraft major Embraer is alleged to have resorted to bribes and used middlemen to secure contracts in India and Saudi Arabia. In India’s case, the payoff was done to a United Kingdom-based middleman in the deal for three Embraer aircraft ordered by the Defence Research and Development Organisation for building indigenous Airborne Early-Warning and Control Systems aircraft for the Indian Air Force.

India has asked an explanation from the Brazilian aircraft-maker Embraer following media reports of an international investigation into the alleged payment of bribes to secure an aircraft deal in 2008.

Embraer is alleged to have used bribes and involved middlemen to secure contracts in India and Saudi Arabia. In India’s case, the payoff was made to a U.K.-based middleman in the deal for three Embraer aircraft ordered by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) for building an indigenous Airborne Early Warning and Control Systems (AEW&C) aircraft for the Indian Air Force. A Defence Ministry spokesperson said on Saturday that the DRDO sought an explanation and details from the manufacturer within 15 days.

Under watch since 2010

According to Brazilian newspaper Folha de Sao Paulo, Embraer had been under investigation by the United States Justice Department since 2010 “when a contract with the Dominican Republic raised the Americans’ suspicions.”

“Since then, the investigation has widened to examine business dealings with eight more countries,” the report said.

The newspaper reported that the company was cooperating in the investigations, and “is expecting to reach a deal soon with American authorities” and has even set aside $200 million to pay “any eventual fines that come about as a result of the process”.

The newspaper has quoted Albert Phillip Close, manager of Embraer’s defence area, as having admitted to the authorities as part of a plea bargain that in the case of India, the aircraft major had contracted a representative to assist in the sale of a surveillance system to the government.

$208-million deal in 2008

India had signed a $208-million deal in 2008 for procuring three Emb-145 aircraft. The planes were delivered beginning 2011 and the project is now nearing completion after a series of delays.

This is the second major defence deal under the scanner after the VVIP chopper case involving Agusta Westland and both the deals were signed by the previous United Progressive Alliance government.

Indian defence procurement prohibits the employment of middlemen in defence deals.

The Defence Ministry spokesperson when asked about the reports said the DRDO will seek explanation and details from manufacturers of Embraer aircraft on media reports on the 2008 deal.

“On receipt of information by the DRDO, further steps may be initiated,” he said.

Drdo

DRDO to seek explanation from Embraer over kickback allegation

Leave a comment

By: PTI | New Delhi | Published:September 10, The New Indian Express

The deal was signed in 2008 between Embraer and the DRDO for three aircraft equipped with indigenous radars for AEW&C (airborne early warning and control systems).DRDO_Logo_New copy

 

India’s defence research agency DRDO will seek explanation and details from Brazilian aircraft maker Embraer over alleged payment of kickbacks in the USD 208-million jet deal inked during the UPA regime. After receipt of information by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), further steps may be initiated, the Defence Ministry said today after it emerged that the 2008 deal has come under the scanner of US authorities which have been probing Embraer for alleged payment of bribe to secure contracts.
“DRDO to seek explanation and details from manufacture of Embraer aircraft on media reports on aircraft deal signed in 2008. “On receipt of information by the DRDO, further steps may be initiated,” the Ministry said. The deal was signed in 2008 between Embraer and the DRDO for three aircraft equipped with indigenous radars for AEW&C (airborne early warning and control systems). The company has been under investigation by the United States Justice Department since 2010 when a contract with the Dominican Republic raised the Americans’ suspicions.
Since then, the investigation has widened to examine business dealings with eight more countries. “Investigations that have been opened by the government of the United States to establish whether Embraer paid bribes in order to obtain contracts abroad have affected deals that the Brazilian company closed with Saudi Arabia and India,” Brazalian newspaper Folha De São Paulo reported. It is suspected that a leading Indian middleman based in UK was roped in for the deal. DRDO chief S Christopher, who headed the AEW&S programme earlier, did not pick up calls or respond to messages.
Embraer is cooperating with the investigations and announced in July that it was expecting to reach a deal soon with American authorities, the paper said. The company has put USD 200 million aside to pay any eventual fines that come about as a result of the process. The company has not released details regarding the state of the investigations, but three people who have been following the case have confirmed to Folha that the deals concluded in Saudi Arabia and India are being examined, the paper reported.
In both cases, suspicions were underlined in May this year when an employee with more than 30 years at the company reached a plea-bargain agreement in investigations being conducted by the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office in Brazil. Albert Phillip Close, Manager of Embraer’s defence area, told Prosecutor Marcello Miller that he had heard a former sales director who worked in Europe admit to American investigators the payment of commissions to facilitate the sale of aircraft to the Saudis.
In November of 2010, the company announced the delivery of two Embraer 170 executive jets to the Saudi Arabian
state-owned oil company Aramco. The amount of the deal was not announced at the time.

 

Drdo

Dr Vijay Veer and Dr AK Singh two gems of DRDO

7 Comments

Dr Vijay Veer, Director, DRL, Tezpur and Dr AK Singh, DOP, DRDO Hqrs have taken a joint project in DRL on not giving transfer even after completion of tenure. They are trying their best to fulfil their ego even when Honourable CAT, Guwahati has ordered the same. Both are putting all efforts to harass their fellow colleagues. Had they even ask their conscience regarding that? I think the answer is no. From the history we know that there is always a rise and fall of dynasties. We do not know what will be the future of them.

This CAT, Guwahati Bench order no. 317/2014 is another example of their joint venture.  In this connection, I would like to draw your kind attention another CAT, Guwahati Bench order no. 49/2010.

Kindly see the point 9 and 10 of CAT, Guwahati Bench order no. 49/2010. It is very important judgement.

CENTRAL ADMINISRATIVE TRIBUNAL

GUWAHATI BENCH

Original Application No. 49 of 2010

Date of Decision: This, the 15th day of March, 2010.

HONBLE SHRI MADAN KUMAR CHATURVEDI, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER

Shri R.Periasamy
Sub-Divisional Engineer
Meghna Division
Central Water Commission
Silchar-788 006
Dist: Cachar, Assam.

Applicant

By Advocate: Mrs. U.Dutta

-Versus-

  1. The Union of India represented by the Secretary
Ministry of Water Resources
Govt. of India, Rafi Marg, Shram Shakti Bhawan
New Delhi – 110 001.
  1. The Chairman
Central Water Commission
Sewa Bhawan, R.K.Puram
New Delhi-110 066.
  1. The Member (WP&P)
Central Water Commission
Sewa Bhawan, R.K.Puram
New Delhi-110 066.
  1. The Chief Engineer (HRM)
Central Water Commission
Sewa Bhawan, R.K.Puram
New Delhi-110 066.
.. Respondents

* * * * * * * *

O R D E R (ORAL)

MADAN KUMAR CHATURVEDI, MEMBER (A):

Applicant is aggrieved against letter dated 06.07.2009 which

reads as under :-

To
The Superintending Engineer (C)
Office of the Chief Engineer B&BBO4/16/2014 Untitled Page
http://judis.nic.in/judis_cat/detail.aspx 2/4
Central Water Commission
Rebekka Ville, Barik Point
Temple Road, Lower Lachumiere
Shillong.

Sub: Representation for transfer of Shri B.Jayakumar,SDE reg.

Sir,

I am directed to refer to your letter o.1/4/(G)/2006-BBB/1972 73, dated 4-6-2009 on the above mentioned subject and to say that after careful consideration of the same the competent authority has not agreed to the requests of S/Shri B.Jayakumar, R.Shankarpandian & R.Periasamy, Sub Divisional Engineers for their transfer from B&BBO, Shillong to C&SRO, Coimbatore.

  1. Adverting to the facts I find that applicant initially joined as Junior Engineer under Central Water Commission on 25.01.1979. After serving at different places, he was eventually transferred from Chennai to Meghna Division, Silchar on 04.07.2007 and has since been continuing in the same station.
  2. The Government of India, Ministry of Finance vide its O.M. No.20014/3/83-E.IV, dated 14.12.1983 granted some incentives to various categories of Central Government employees for serving in North Eastern States of India. Said O.M. provides, inter alia, that there will be fixed tenure of posting of 3 years at a time for officers with 10 years service or less and 2 years at a time for officers with more than 10 years. Officials on completion of fixed tenure of service may be considered for posting of their choice as far as possible. Applicant has completed more than 20 years of service for respondents organization. He joined at Silchar (Assam) on 04.07.2007 and completed prescribed tenure of 2 years in N.E.Region on 04.07.2009. As such he became entitled to his choice place of posting.On 17.01.2009 applicant has given choice place of posting as under:-

By Advocate: Mrs. U.Dutta

-Versus-

  1. The Union of India represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources

Govt. of India, Rafi Marg, Shram Shakti Bhawan, New Delhi – 110 001.

  1. The Chairman Central Water Commission, Sewa Bhawan, R.K.Puram, New Delhi-110 066.
  2. The Member (WP&P),Central Water Commission, Sewa Bhawan, R.K.Puram, New Delhi-110 066.
  3. The Chief Engineer (HRM), Central Water Commission, Sewa Bhawan, R.K.Puram, New Delhi-110 066.

.. Respondents

* * * * * * * *

O R D E R (ORAL)

MADAN KUMAR CHATURVEDI, MEMBER (A):

Applicant is aggrieved against letter dated 06.07.2009 which reads as under :-

To
The Superintending Engineer (C)
Office of the Chief Engineer B&BBO4/16/2014 Untitled Page
http://judis.nic.in/judis_cat/detail.aspx 2/4
Central Water Commission
Rebekka Ville, Barik Point
Temple Road, Lower Lachumiere
Shillong.

Sub: Representation for transfer of Shri B.Jayakumar, SDE reg.

Sir,

I am directed to refer to your letter o.1/4/(G)/2006-BBB/1972 73, dated 4-6-2009 on the above mentioned subject and to say that after careful consideration of the same the competent authority has not agreed to the requests of S/Shri B.Jayakumar, R.Shankarpandian & R.Periasamy, Sub Divisional Engineers for their transfer from B&BBO, Shillong to C&SRO, Coimbatore.

  1. Adverting to the facts I find that applicant initially joined as Junior Engineer under Central Water Commission on 25.01.1979. After serving at different places, he was eventually transferred from Chennai to Meghna Division, Silchar on 04.07.2007 and has since been continuing in the same station.
  2. The Government of India, Ministry of Finance vide its O.M. No.20014/3/83-E.IV, dated 14.12.1983 granted some incentives to various categories of Central Government employees for serving in North Eastern States of India. Said O.M. provides, inter alia, that there will be fixed tenure of posting of 3 years at a time for officers with 10 years service or less and 2 years at a time for officers with more than 10 years. Officials on completion of fixed tenure of service may be considered for posting of their choice as far as possible. Applicant has completed more than 20 years of service for respondents organization. He joined at Silchar (Assam) on 04.07.2007 and completed prescribed tenure of 2 years in N.E.Region on 04.07.2009. As such he became entitled to his choice place of posting.

On 17.01.2009 applicant has given choice place of posting as under:-

  1. OPTED STATIONS/REGIONS:-

3). Delta Sub Division-Karikkal under C&SR Region-Coimbatore To buttress the claim following reasons were adduced:-

1). My 75 years old mother staying with my family. She needs constant medical care. Hence my

presence is required at Chennai.

2). I have 27 years Son & 23 years Daughter at Chennai, to fix suitable alliance, as a father my presence is very essential.

  1. It is palpable from the perusal of impugned letter dated 06.07.2009 that request made by applicant was turned down without assigning any cogent reason. Mrs.U.Dutta, learned counsel for applicant strongly relied on the decision of this Bench rendered in the case of Sanjay Garg vs. Union of India in O.A. No.175 of 2009 dated 04..02.2010. Relevant portion of said judgment is reproduced below:-
  2. We have heard the rival submissions. It is stipulated in the office memorandum dated 14.12.1983 that officers on completion of the fixed tenure of service in the State or Union Territories of North East Region may be considered for posting to a station of their choice as far as possible. May is an auxiliary verb qualifying the meaning of another verb by expressing ability, competency, liberty, permission, possibility, probability or contingency. Regardless of the instrument however, whether Constitution, statute, deed contract or whatever, Courts not infrequently construe may as shall or must to the end that justice may not be the slave of grammar. However, as a general rule, the word may will not be treated as a word of command unless there is something in context or subject matter of act to indicate that it was used in such sense. It appears that to attract competent officers to serve in the North East Region the provision for choice transfer was made. Right to give a choice was bestowed on the employees. Once a right is created it cannot be disturbed without any legal justification. Jurisprudentially, speaking right is an interest, protected under the law. The justification which is given by the respondents qua, the non consideration of choice is correct in the context of normal transfer rules but when it is stipulated that officer on completion of fixed tenure of service at North East

Region may be considered for posting to a station of their choice, it is incumbent on the authorities concerned to accommodate the officer at the place of his choice as far as possible. However, for some reasons, if such posting is not possible, opportunity of being heard, must be provided and detailed order should be passed stating the reasons as to why the concerned officer could not be accommodated at the place of his choice.

  1. Transfer can uproot a family, cause irreparable loss to an employee and drive him into desperation. It disrupts education of his children and leads to numerous other complication and problems and cause hardship and demoralization. It therefore follows that policy of transfer should be reasonable and fair and should apply to everybody equally. It cannot be gain said that transfer is an exigency of service and may be ordered for administrative reason and the employer is the best judge in this regard. In a Welfare State to maintain the rule of law attempt should be made to ensure fairness and equality of treatment, arbitrariness should be avoided at all cost. The proposition that who will be posted where is within the discretion of the authorities in control of the matter, is not absolute. It is subject to the limits of law. By serving in the North East Region applicant gained right of consideration for posting to a station of his choice. This fact was not correctly appreciated by the respondents.

The obligation which emanated out of the assurance given to the employee for coming to North East Region was not properly discharged. The issue was not examined in the right perspective. The rule of audi alteram partem (no one should be condemned unheard) was not followed. Taking into consideration the entire conspectus of the case, we direct the respondents to accommodate the applicant at the place of his choice within four months from the date of this order. Meanwhile applicant be not disturbed from the place of his present posting.

I find that facts of the present case are squarely covered by the ratio of the aforesaid ruling. In the present case also I find that obligation which emanated out of the assurance given to the employee for coming to North East Region was not properly discharged. The issue was not examined in right perspective. The rule of audi alteram parterm (no one should be condemned unheard) was not followed. Respondents did not assign any reason in rejecting the request for choice posting. Having regard to the facts, I direct the respondents to accommodate the applicant on the place of his choice within a period of four months from the date of receipt of order. Meanwhile, applicant be not disturbed from his present place of posting.

  1. In the result, O.A. stands disposed of accordingly. No costs.

(MADAN KUMAR CHATURVEDI)

MEMBER (A)

/BB/

O.A.49 of 2010

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

GUWAHATI BENCH

Original Application No. 040/00317/2014

Date of Order: This, the 08th Day of September, 2014

THE HONBLE SMT. MANJULA DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER

THE HONBLE MOHD. HALEEM KHAN, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER

Dr. C. Rajendran,
Scientist D,
Defence Research Laboratory,
Defence Research & Development Organization,
Post Box No.2, Tezpur,
Assam-784 001.

Applicant

By Advocates: Mrs.U.Dutta & Mr.C.S.Hazarika

-Versus-

  1. The Union of IndiaRepresented by the Secretaryto the Ministry of FinanceSouth Block, New Delhi-110001.
  1. The Director General,Defence Research & Development Organization,Ministry of Defence, Govt. of India, DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg, New Delhi 110 105.
 
  1. The Director,Directorate of Personnel,Defence Research & Development Organization, Ministry of Defence, Govt. of India, DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg, New Delhi 110 105.
  1. The Director, Defence Research Laboratory, Defence Research & Development Organization, Post Box No.2, Tezpur, Assam-784 001. Respondents

Advocate:

O R D E R (ORAL)

MANJULA DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

By this O.A., applicant makes a prayer to direct the respondent to consider his choice posting in any of the stations of his choices, namely Coimbatore, Chennai, Mysore or Gwalior.

  1. Mrs. U.Dutta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submitted that applicant has joined as Scientist B for the post Parasitology (Microbiology) in Defence Research Laboratory, Tezpur on 07.01.2004. He was promoted to the grade of Scientist C from 01.07.2007 and further to the grade of Scientist D on 01.07.2014 and he has been continuing at Tezpur as such.
  1. According to the learned counsel, applicant is a permanent resident of village Chathirappatti, Thanjvur district of11/15/2014 Untitled Page http://judis.nic.in/judis_cat/CaseNo_Cat_Result.aspx 2/3 Tamilnadu and he has completed his fixed tenure of 3 (three) years in the N.E. Region way back in 2007 and on completion of his fixed tenure of posting at N.E. Region, he is entitled to any of his choice place of posting. To buttress her argument, learned counsel has drawn our attention to Clause (i) of the O.M. dated 14.12.1983 which reads as under:-

(i) Tenure of posting/deputation:

There will be a fixed tenure of posting of 3 years at a time for officers with service of 10 years or less and of 2 years at a time for officers with more than 10 years of service. Periods of leave, training, etc. in excess of 15 days per year will be excluded in counting the tenure period of 2/3 years. Officers, on completion of the fixed tenure of service mentioned above, may be considered for posting to a station of their choice as far as possible. The period of deputation of the Central Government employees to the States/Union Territories of the North Eastern Region will generally be for 3 years which can be extended in exceptional cases in exigencies of public service as well as when the employee concerned is prepared to stay longer. The admissible deputation allowance will also continue to be paid during the period of deputation so extended.

According to the learned counsel, aforesaid beneficial provision was subsequently extended by the O.M.s dated 01.12.1988 and 22.07.1998.

  1. According to the learned counsel, applicant’s mother who is a widow is staying alone in his native village and has been suffering from various heart related problems since several years and there is no one to look after her. Applicant being the eldest son in his family has not been unable to look after her in her need as applicant is posted far off place. That apart, according to the learned counsel during his stay at Tezpur, applicant, his wife and son had developed certain ailments due to extreme weather and climate do not suited them.
  1. According to the learned counsel, due to the aforesaid compelling reasons applicant submitted various representations before the respondents i.e., on 07.04.2008, 12.06.2008, 02.05.2011, 12.09.2012, 13.05.2013, 02.07.2013, 11.07.2013, 23.07.2013 and 24.07.2014 seeking posting in any of the choice places, namely Gwalior, Coimbatore, Chennai or Mysore upon completion of his fixed tenure in N.E.Region, but the respondents have not considered any of his representations till date.
  1. Learned counsel further submitted that as many as five Scientists, namely Dr. Mehbuba Begum, Shri Y V S Rao, Dr.Jubilee Purkayastha, Dr. Anurag Pandey and Dr. Gaurav Agnihotri, who have jointed at DRL, Tezpur much later than the applicant, have been transferred out to their choices out of N E Region, but in an arbitrary and unreasonable manner the respondents, the respondents have not yet transferred the applicant to any of his choice places despite completion of his tenure at N.E. Region.
  1. We have heard the learned counsel for the applicant, perused the pleadings and material placed before us.
  1. Clause (i) of the OM dated 14th December 1983 prescribes that there will be a fixed tenure of posting of 3 years at a time for officers with service of 10 years or less and of 2 years at a time11/15/2014 Untitled Page http://judis.nic.in/judis_cat/CaseNo_Cat_Result.aspx 3/3 for officers with more than 10 years of service. It was further prescribed therein that – officers, on completion of the fixed tenure of service mentioned above, may be considered for posting to a station of their choice as far as possible. The said OM confers a right upon the applicant to be considered for being posted at his place of posting as far as possible. Applicant has completed his tenure of three years in 2007 at DLR, Tezpur. Upon completion of his fixed tenure in N.E.Region, applicant has opted for 4 choice places of posing, namely, Gwalior, Coimbatore, Chennai or Mysore in his representations, the respondents ought to have considered his request, inasmuch as applicant has been continuing at DLR, Tezpur for more than 7 years even after the completion of his tenure.
  1. In the case of Union of India vs. Dr. Umesh Kr. Mishra WA No. (SH) 17/2012, Honble Gauhati High Court has held that Fairness requires that if a policy has been laid down, the same may be deviated from only if there is any reason to do so. If no reason is forthcoming, the exercise of power of transfer in violation of a laid down policy may be held to be arbitrary. This Tribunal in its decisions rendered in the cases of S K Garg v. UOI & Ors (OA.179/2009 and R.Periasamy v. UOI & Ors (OA.49/2010) held that it was incumbent on the authorities to accommodate the officer at the place of his choice after completion of his fixed tenure and if such posting is not possible opportunity of being heard must be provided and detailed order should be passed stating the reasons as to why the concerned officer could not be accommodated at his place of choice.

Therefore, the respondents ought to have considered the case of the applicant for his posting at any of his 4 choices after completion of his tenure at N. E. Region and in the event of their inability to accommodate him at any of his places of choice; reasoned order ought to have been passed after affording him a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Such steps having not taken, it is a fit case to direct the respondents to consider the case of the applicant for his posting in any of his 4 choices.

  1. For the reasons, narrated above, we direct the respondents to consider his transfer to any of his choice places, namely, Gwalior, Coimbatore, Chennai or Mysore subject to the availability of vacancy in the light of the aforesaid OMs as well as the observation made hereinabove, as expeditiously as possible, but not later than a period of four months from the date of the receipt of this order.
  1. O.A. stands disposed of accordingly at the admission stage. No order as to costs.

(MOHD. HALEEM KHAN) (MANJULA DAS) ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Drdo

RTI-PCDA (R&D) – Verification of Diploma/Degree

1 Comment
To,                                                                                                                    16th July 2014
Shri Pritam Dutta, IDAS
ACDA, CPIO,CVO
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 Act, 2005 in respect of audit of service books of DRDO officials. It is observed that several DRDO officials were acquired Diploma, Degree after joining DRDO from various deemed universities  via distance education mode etc  and most of the cases the courses are not recognised by APEX body like  AICTE,DEC etc  in RTI replies DRDO also accepted this facts.   It is also observed that the individuals who received such diploma/ degrees were also received lump sum incentive grants for acquiring higher qualification as per DOPT OM No. 1/2/89-Estt Pay-I dated 9.4.99 but their respective acquired qualifications were not duly verified by DRDO

  1. Provide the certified copies of verification reports provide by DRDO in respect of following individuals.

Acquired from JNTU, Hyderabad

  1. Sh. Siyaram, STA B  RCI  B Tech Mech   1.6.2010
  2. Shri A Venkateshwara Rao, STA B DRDL,  B Tech Mech  1.8.2010
  3. Sh. G Venkatesh STA B DMRL  B Tech Civil   7.3.2012
  4. Sh. B Baludu, TO A RCI,   B Tech Mech  7.3.2012

Acquired from  MAHARSHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY, ROHTAK

  1. Sh U Maheshwarn, STA C DIPR  M Sc,CS  3.9.2009
  2. Sh Deepak Kumar, STA B DESIDOC  M Sc,CS 31.3.2010
  3. Smt Laxmi Verma, STA C DESIDOC   M Sc,CS 20.09.2011
  4. Sh Puneet Kumar, STA C DESIDOC  M Sc,CS 30.09.2011
  5.  Sh Mandeep Singh Basra, STA B IRDE  M Sc,CS 30.09.2012

Acquired from ANNA UNIVERSITY, CHENNAI

  1. Sh R Anandh, STA B CVRDE   BTech E &C E   1.12. 2010
  2. Sh S Purshotham, STA B CVRDE   BTech Mech 1.12. 2010

Acquired from  ANDHRA UNIVERSITY, Visakhapatnam

  1. Sh Ankam Sreekar, STA B,  SFC BTech E&EE  28.2.2011
  2.  Sh Ram Prakash Yadava, STA B , SFC  BTech Chem  9.2.2011
  3. Sh U Thanigaivelan, STA C , HEMRL BTech Chem  28.2.2011
  4. Sh P V Krushna Rao, STA C NSTL  BTech Chem 12.8.2011
  5. Sh M Mahesh, STA C NSTL   B.Tech Mech 22.8.2012
  6. Sh K V Ranga Rao, TO C NSTL  BTech Chem  8.8.2012
  7. Sh V Venkateshwarlu, STA C, NSTL  B.Tech Mech 23.2.2013

Acquired from JRN University, Rajasthan

  1. Sh Rakesh Kumar Soni, STA C  BTech Chem 13.7.2012
  2.  Sh Shankar K N, STA C LRDE  B.Tech  Mech 12.1.2013
  3. Sh Amit Chawla, STA B LASTEC  B.Tech EC&Ein 16.8.2012

Acquired from Sikkim Manipal University, Gangtok

  1. Smt.Sampaty Senapati,  STA ‘C’ ITR M Sc, CS 9.8.2013
  2. Smt Balbir Kaur, TO  C  RAC   M Sc, CS 10.5.2013
  3. Sh Narendra Kumar Thakur, TO C SASE acquired M Sc, CS 24.1.2012
  4. Sh Srinivas Juluru, TO B DRDL  M Sc, CS 1.5.2006
  5. Sh Arvind Kumar, STA B INMAS   M Sc, 25.9.2012

Note : Matter is directly related to corruption and not exempted under Section 24 (1) as a proof the RTI replies and DOP, DRDO letter is enclosed

Regards

Prabhu  Dandriyal,
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun -248008

Registration Number         MODEF/R/2014/61246

Drdo

By The Way, I Dropped It

1 Comment

EXCLUSIVE
INTELLIGENCE SECURITY BREACHES
By The Way, I Dropped It
India’s defence data could be an open secret. Ask the NTRO bosses who lost their laptops.
SAIKAT DATTA – OUTLOOK INDIA.COM

MAGAZINE | AUG 30, 2010

The Agni missile: India’s nuclear delivery mechanism could well be in enemy knowledge
The Agni missile: India’s nuclear delivery mechanism could well be in enemy knowledge

In 2006, Ravind Sistala was one among a clutch of scientists on deputation from the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) to the National Technical Research Organisation (NTRO) in New Delhi. Set up in the aftermath of the 1999 Kargil War, NTRO was meant to be a single technical intelligence facility to keep watch on India’s hostile neighbours. It was also supposed to issue warning signals to those manning India’s missile systems and nuclear warheads in real time so that they could retaliate in case of a possible enemy strike. Sistala’s was a crucial job. The fortysomething was the centre director of NTRO’s missile monitoring division, a position that called for high levels of responsibility and secrecy. But very few within India’s security apparatus are aware, even today, that Sistala was involved in one of the biggest security breaches in India’s post-Independence history. He compromised a Rs 1,850-crore intelligence-gathering programme that had key linkages to India’s growing nuclear arsenal and missile systems. Unencrypted ‘Top Secret’ data pertaining to these was stored on Sistala’s Hewlett-Packard laptop (given to him by NTRO) which disappeared mysteriously while he was on his way to the Delhi airport in early 2006. Did the information-packed computer fall into the wrong hands? Was it stolen by an enemy agent? Even today, no one knows where the laptop is. If still in enemy hands, it has the potential to inflict immense damage.

Ideally, such a security leak should have set alarm bells ringing and occasioned a swift and thorough investigation by the IB, RAW and Delhi Police. But rather than give the incident the attention and inquiry it deserved, a small but extremely powerful group of people—comprising a PMO official, DRDO scientists on deputation to NTRO and intelligence officials—helped Sistala escape any indictment by holding just an in house inquiry, which unearthed little. The missing laptop forgotten, Sistala continued as the head of the sensitive missile programme for another two years, and then returned to the DRDO.

Two years after the Sistala episode, another security breach took place in the NTRO. Arun Dixit, the centre director of the organisation’s atomic explosion division (AED), lost his laptop somewhere in Washington DC during an official trip to the US with the NTRO chairman. The laptop was crammed with top secret data on India’s intelligence on the nuclear weapons programmes of several countries, including Pakistan, China and North Korea. But like in Sistala’s case, the powerful lobby of defence scientists once again scuttled a thorough investigation. The leak was buried and kept out of the files. Dixit too escaped any scrutiny and still serves in the NTRO in the very same post.
Lost Laptops And Their ‘X’ Files

Place Delhi
Year 2006
Official Involved Ravind Sistala
Designation Centre Director (missile monitoring division)
Organisation National Technical Research Organisation
Incident Laptop goes missing from his car

Secret Data Lost

Presentations on Indian efforts to monitor missiles of neighboring countries
Details on the capabilities of the nuclear delivery systems of Pakistan and China
Response options available to India’s nuclear forces (Strategic Forces Command)
Deployment of radars to counter incoming missiles
Vulnerable points in India’s air defence network
Action taken None. Laptop not recovered. Official transferred to DRDO in a more sensitive position.

***

Place Washington DC
Year 2008
Official Involved Arun Dixit
Designation Centre Director (atomic devices division)
Organisation NTRO

Secret Data Lost

Defence nuclear programmes of neighbouring countries
Nuclear proliferation in Asia
Dirty bombs being made in neighbouring countries
Action taken None. Laptop not recovered. After probe, errant official retained in the same organisation.

***

Place Delhi
Year 2003
Organisation Defence Research and Development Organisation
Incident 53 computers go missing; later found with hard disks removed

Secret Data Lost

Secret coding of all communication used by the Intelligence Bureau (IB), Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), the defence forces, and the paramilitary forces, including Border Security Force
Logs of intercepted Pakistani communications
Action taken Case still unsolved. None of the hard disks have been recovered. DRDO has practically closed the case.

Sistala and Dixit clearly violated OSA, but escaped. They were also liable to 14 years’ imprisonment.

The NTRO was set up in the summer of ’03. A year earlier, a Group of Ministers had handpicked RAW special secretary R.S. Bedi to set up the new intelligence outfit. Bedi started the process by setting up an office in room no. 326, Sardar Patel Bhavan, in the heart of Delhi, on March 29, 2003. The organisation was formally notified in July.

Set up to plug gaps in India’s security establishment post the Kargil debacle, the NTRO’s charter eventually went much beyond the mere act of gathering intelligence. It became a key element within the security apparatus, hitting headlines recently when Outlook reported its ability to pluck GSM phone calls off the air. Bedi had served in RAW’s Aviation Research Centre, which monitored the missile and atomic programmes of neighbours. NTRO took on this responsibility after it came into being.

NTRO’s task thus was to monitor and gather intelligence on all missile programmes in the region and convey the data in real time to the Strategic Forces Command (SFC), a special military organisation that mans India’s nuclear arsenal and would deploy it in the event of a nuclear war. The SFC would also, based on NTRO data, periodically review and upgrade its positioning of nuclear missiles, and coordinate with the defence forces in launching a counter-strike against any nuclear threat.

This called for a credible linkage between a vast and intricate network of ground-based radars, satellites, secret command codes and SFC’s nuclear arsenal. NTRO’s missile monitoring division established these linkages and set up an early warning network for the SFC. Sistala had a key role in creating these linkages and as such had access to the most sensitive data on India’s capabilities, response time and secret codes. Naturally enough, all these details were part of the presentations, notes, documents, files and folders—all marked ‘Top Secret’—he had on the laptop he was given by the NTRO. Standard rules mandate that a laptop given by the organisation cannot be taken home or used to connect to the Internet. But these being early days for NTRO, Sistala was travelling around the country making presentations to security officials, beginning with then NSA M.K. Narayanan to the three service chiefs, the SFC commander, the intelligence chiefs and other top DRDO scientists who were to work on the technological aspects of the project.
This is the time his laptop went missing. Shockingly, NTRO buried the episode in no time. A preliminary inquiry was ordered to be carried out by Brigadier Anil Malhotra, its counter-intelligence official, but it was quickly wound up. By this time, Bedi had retired from NTRO. A powerful lobby of defence scientists, led by R. Chidambaram, the principal scientific advisor to the government, had already determined his successor: DRDO scientist K.V.S.S. Prasad Rao. Rao had no previous experience in intelligence but he had served as the staff officer to Chidambaram for several years. Sistala, also from the DRDO, got a much-needed reprieve from the ongoing inquiry. He continued with the missile monitoring division for two more years before returning to the DRDO to work on air defence radars.

Outlook’s attempts to elicit an official comment from NTRO via a detailed questionnaire sent a week before going to print met with silence. Phone calls and text messages to NTRO chairman Prasad Rao, its advisor P.V. Kumar, Sistala and Dixit evoked no response either. DRDO, in a cryptic response to an Outlook query, said it wasn’t aware of any lapses by Sistala at NTRO.

Such security breaches are nothing new for the clique that still lords it over DRDO and NTRO. In Oct ’03, 53 computers were stolen one night from two DRDO labs—the Systems Analysis Group and the Institute for Systems Analysis and Studies—in Metcalfe House in Delhi. The computer carcasses were found later, but the hard disks had been removed. They contained secret encryption codes and communications of the army, navy, air force and all central police organisations. Till date, no DRDO scientist has been blamed. Many have even been promoted. A police investigation made no headway, while an internal inquiry remains alive on paper even though many of its members have retired.

It’s also ironical that while many other officials have been prosecuted under the Official Secrets Act (OSA) on flimsy and concocted cases (see following story), Sistala and Dixit have escaped, despite being in clear violation of the OSA. In fact, since the leaks were related to India’s nuclear defence as well as secret codes, they could easily have attracted a penalty of 14 years’ imprisonment. Instead, the duo has continued in their careers. Should India’s intelligence agencies really be allowed to operate without even a modicum of accountability?

 

Drdo

DRDO Hqrs Not Having Capabilities to Manage Fake/ Unrecognized Diploma /Degree Business – II

1 Comment
To,                                                                               3rd  February 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 to  your RTI reply RTI/01/2091/P/2013/0387 dated 27th December 2013 regarding  on acquiring higher qualification by DRDO officials at their own. As per details provide by DRDO RTI cell the following DRDO official acquired their qualification from Jawharlal  Nehru Technological University, Hyderabad. The website of Jawharlal  Nehru Technological University, Hyderabad stated in their website that “ the school was offering B.Tech correspondence – cum – contact programme (CCC) from 1983 to 2009. Keeping in view of the ACITE guidelines for B.Tech (CCC) has been suspended since 2010.”

Refer to DOP&T O.M. No. 1/2/89 – Estt. (Pay-I) dated 9-4-1999 para -3

“The qualifications meriting grant of incentive should be recognised by the All India Council for Technical Education, Department of Electronics, Deemed University, University or recognised by the Government”

  1. Sh. Siyaram, STA ‘B’  RCI acquired B Tech Mech Engg in 1 June 2010 from JNTU, Hyderabad
  2. Shri A Venkateshwara Rao, STA ‘B’ DRDL, acquired B Tech Mech Engg in 1 August 2010 from JNTU, Hyderabad
  3. Sh. G Venkatesh STA ‘, DMRL acquired B Tech Civil Engg in 7 March 2012 from JNTU, Hyderabad
  4. Sh. B Baludu, TO’A’ RCI, acquired B Tech Mech. Engg in 7 March 2012 from JNTU, Hyderabad

In respect of above please provide following information.

  1. The certified copy of verification before approving lump sum grant of incentive to above officials.
  2. Certified copy of recommendation for lump sum grant of incentive received by competent authority from their respective establishments.
  3. Copy of DRDO’s procedure followed for verification of Degree’s/Diploma/M.Sc/ Ph D

Note : Matter is directly related to corruption and not exempted under Section 24 (1)

Regards

Prabhu  Dandriyal,
21-Sunderwala, Raipur,
Phone 0135- 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,
e-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com  website www.corruptionindrdo.com

Registration Number            – MODEF/R/2014/60222

jntu

 

RTI  http://bit.ly/1lwUyBO  Reply from DRDO

RTI reply RTI reply1 RTI reply2 RTI reply3 RTI reply4 RTI reply5 RTI reply6 RTI reply7 RTI reply8 RTI reply9 RTI reply10

Drdo

यौन उत्पीड़न में फंसे वैज्ञानिक का समर्पण – Dainik Jagran

1 Comment

Updated on: Wed, 04 Dec 2013 09:40 AM (IST)
नई दुनिया, ग्वालियर। शोध छात्रा के यौन उत्पीड़न में फंसे रक्षा अनुसंधान और विकास संगठन (डीआरडीओ) के वैज्ञानिक प्रभात गर्ग ने मंगलवार को पुलिस के समक्ष समर्पण कर दिया। कोर्ट ने उन्हें दो दिन की पुलिस हिरासत में भेज दिया।

2010 -2011 के दौरान डीआरडीओ में शोध करने आई कर्नाटक की एक छात्रा ने 30 नवंबर को वैज्ञानिक के खिलाफ यौन उत्पीड़न की शिकायत दर्ज कराई थी।

वैज्ञानिक प्रभात गर्ग ने पुलिस को बताया कि वह निर्दोष हैं और साजिश के तहत उन्हें फंसाया जा रहा है, जबकि छात्रा ने आरोप लगाए हैं कि वैज्ञानिक ने शोध पूरा न कराने की धमकी देकर उसके साथ छेड़छाड़ की और प्रेम संबंध बनाने का दबाव डाला।

शोध की अहमियत को देखते हुए उस दौरान वह शांत रही। लेकिन जब छात्रा को शादी के बाद भी वैज्ञानिक एसएमएस भेजकर परेशान करने लगा तो उसने विश्वविद्यालय थाने में शिकायत दर्ज करा दी। इसके बाद गर्ग गायब हो गए थे लेकिन परिजनों पर बढ़ते दबाव की वजह से उन्होंने समर्पण कर दिया।