Tag Archives: Accountability

Drdo

Policy bankruptcy in DRDO – hype to create artificial crisis

1 Comment
डीआरडीओ में नीति का दिवालियापन – कृत्रिम संकट पैदा करने के लिए प्रचार
To                                                                                                                                 28th May 2014
Sh. Narendra Modi,
Prime Minister,
Room No – 152, PMO,
South Block, NEW DELHI -110011

With 64 Crores annual budget in 1980, when Dr. V S Arunachalam took over as Scientific Adviser, the budget allocation enhanced to 1100 crores with missions made to develop missiles under IGMDP program.

That was the beginning of infrastructure development and deteriorating of scientific research and development. By March every year i.e. the closer of financial year, everyone from Scientist ’B’ to SA to RM office were looking for procurement cases only and those who met the expenditure by any means were rewarded with scientist of the year award.

However the conscious financial officers use to raise objections, so special provisions were made and duly approved by ministry. SA to RM was given special powers to procure under single quotation more than Rs. 10 lakh where procurement committee could be bypassed. This decision was taken to facilitate the speedy development of technology for missiles.

The incumbent after Kalam, further modified the single tender purchase and the SA office granted permission for procurement of one lakh rupees only.

The cases were raised left and right on single tender procurements, where hefty sums were returned to indenter as kickback. This procedure became a culture of DRDO and when in 2006 DRDO Purchase Manual was introduce and policy was framed, Directors powers were raised to 50 Lakhs rupees with Hqrs. rep in crores and SA’s power raised up to 50 crores.

When previous Defence Minister Sh. A K Antony noticed the foul smell, he ordered CGDA for special audit of DRDO. CGDA found that DRDO Directors including Scientific Adviser misused the funds by splitting procurement orders within their limit of sanction power. They fooled the country in all possible ways. A well known fact is that 70% of DRDO requirements come from foreign countries; it means that DRDO is wasting precious foreign currency which is hard earned by the country.

DRDO procured, in last 10 years, thousands of crores of rupees equipments and these equipments are lying idle in various Lab premises and waiting for their departure to the scrap house.

With the passage of time DRDO has become a dumping ground of obsolete technology and a way to needlessly waste the poor tax payers’ money without any end result.

Honorable Prime Minister is requested to overhaul the DRDO structure totally and take strong actions to implement Accountability.

With warm regards

Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun-248008
Phone – 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,
E-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com, Website – www.corruptionindrdo.com
Drdo

After First Extension, Second Extension than Contract without output please spare the country

Leave a comment
To                                                                                                                                 27th may 2014
Sh. Narendra Modi
Prime Minister
Room No – 152, PMO,
South Block, NEW DELHI -110011

Subject:  The Appointment Committee of the Cabinet appointed Sh. Avinash Chander on contract basis.

With the passage of time the dignity of the office of Scientific Adviser to RM has taken a nose dive. Initially the organization (DRDO) was headed by eminent scholars and internationally recognized faces like Dr. D S Kothari, Dr. S Bhagavantam, Dr. B D Nagchaudhuri, Prof. M G K  Menon, Dr. Raja Ramanna and Dr. V S Arunachalam  whose scientific contribution were know across the globe.

Unfortunately when the honorary post of the Scientific Adviser to RM was converted to DG, DRDO and Secretary DRD, the takers of the plum post were apolitical. The search committee used to recommend a person with established credentials as the individual would lead 30000 strong scientific/technical workforces and was supposed to deliver products for three defence forces.

The KARGIL War however exposed the credit of DRDO as countrymen were ditched. The justification of successive failures was given as the non-availability of imported critical systems/subsystems, components, etc.

Later, the top offices gave a new theory of system integration instead of developing indigenous systems/subsystems as import substitutes. The successive government was not in a position to analyze properly the role of DRDO and the fallout was that a vacuum was created in the chain of command.

As far as the expenditure is concerned, the office of Scientific Adviser’s focus shifted to infrastructure development (primarily acquiring land, expansion of building and dumping of equipment) instead of research and development of systems.

DRDO consumes Rs. 10000 crores annually.

The scientific community down the channel are preparing justification for annual expenditure and in the absence of ACCOUNTABILITY they simply burry the product in the name of technology demonstration with obsolete technology imported from elsewhere.

When Dr. V K Saraswat, Ex-SA to RM was due to retire after successive extensions. The search committee was ignorant to the requirement of SA to RM’s office and new incumbent Sh. Avinash Chander was selected by ACC out of the 12 officers without having any credential to their account even on national level.

The information revealed under RTI is enclosed for your ready reference.

Honorable Sir, after sixty six years of independence, for first time people of India have given such a great and unprecedented mandate based on your commitment, patriotism and providing avenues for betterment of the country.

The previous government, even after being in office for two successive terms, had failed to implement ACCOUNTABILITY in DRDO. DRDO with passage of time has reduced to a mere organization where the workforce is provided hefty salaries as social commitments.

We hope that DRDO will overhaul thoroughly and with ACCOUNTABILITY enforced, turn into a productive organization.

Currently, DRDO has a large number of scientists in service extensions 60 to 62 and 62 to 64 and the astonishing fact is that maximum are involved in non-scientific activities.

Early address to this “extension business” and “Contract Business” will help to curb the neck deep corruption in DRDO.

It is really strange that in 125 crore families, we have not been able to find the right eligible person and have ended up relying upon contract culture.

With warm regards

Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun-248008
Phone – 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,
E-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com, Website – www.corruptionindrdo.com

 

Enclosed

  1. Copy of RTI reply from CPIO, Cabinet Secretariatavanash chander recuirtment details avanash chander recuirtment details1 avanash chander recuirtment details2
Drdo

Advice from ex-chief: Accountability absolute must

2 Comments

Advice from ex-chief: Accountability absolute must

Amitav Ranjan
Posted: Sun Nov 19 2006, 00:00 hrs
New Delhi, November 18:

DRDO should definitely be held more accountable for its work and it should stop saying it can do everything under the sun.

Coming from Dr Vasudev K Aatre, who headed the organisation between 2000-04, this could be the luxury of hindsight but yet, a painfully candid admission to the need for reform.

Now a professor at the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, Aatre has responded to this newspaper’s investigative series on DRDO’s dismal record (for the previous seven parts, visit www.expressindia.com). “I have been honest about our delays, I could not hide our shortcomings. There is a need to break certain cycles as the series in The Indian Express has shown. It is crucial that DRDO is a dictator of its own destiny.”

For that to happen, Aatre prescribes a five-point programme fundamental to which is, what he calls, “the absolute must for accountability.” And, two, the brisk introduction of the private sector into the fold of defence R&D to take away the burden of prototype production.

Calling for the immediate implementation of the incentive list for scientists — from sharing royalty to increased travel allowances — Aatre says the “Damocles’ Sword of imports” should not be allowed to hang over scientists engaged in fundamental research. Finally, and probably most importantly, “DRDO should stop making exaggerated promises.”

The aspect of talent retention is severely underestimated. Even President A P J Abdul Kalam, who headed DRDO through the ‘90s and saw first-hand the initial exodus of scientists to the newly booming IT sector — over 1400 have left in the last decade — said on November 11 in Ahmedabad: “We should work for the creation of a science cadre, with a clear mission and goal, well-defined growth path, and attractive salaries.”

But better remuneration is just one side of an intricate polygon of reform that DRDO admitted in June to be working on. The other crucial aspect is DRDO’s involvement with the services. The Navy, the smallest of the three armed forces, has the best depth of relations with DRDO but the less said about the Army and IAF, the better.

Experience has shown that programmes in which the agenda is set by senior serving officers, as in Navy’s avionics and sonars, have always performed with the greatest prudence — delivering on time, and cutting away losses when viability was severely undermined.

In June, as a start, the Standing Committee on Defence directed the DRDO to draw up a list of unviable projects that could be terminated.

But there is a consensus that synergy with the services is one way out of the present mess. Says Gen Shankar Roy Choudhary, former Army chief and member of the Standing Committee on Defence: “Coordination and interaction need a great deal of improvement. DRDO should make sure that officers from the services are part of design teams, and not looked upon as outsiders. Even today, they are accepted very reluctantly. I tried to do my bit in my time as Chief, but somehow it did not work out. This should be an immediate area of reform.”

Choudhary’s recommendation is an echo of what was officially proposed by the Defence Ministry’s Task Force on the “Reorganization of Higher Defence Planning”: a three-star serving officer should head the steering committee of DRDO programmes and the Armed forces personnel embedded with these programmes be recognised as integral members of the DRDO design team. None of this has been implemented yet.

New Defence Minister A K Antony, who received a three-and-a-half hour presentation on the DRDO on October 29, five days into office, told The Sunday Express, “In the few weeks that I have been here, I have realized the need for big changes. We need comprehensive reforms in this area to keep with changing situations. Over the next few weeks, I will be looking at this aspect in great detail.”

Consider what one of emerging India’s pioneers in industrial R&D, Biocon chairperson Kiran Mazumdar Shaw has to say about DRDO: “Every research establishment in the country needs to be reformed. Defence is one area where we need a high level of innovation. Enough is not being done and the DRDO is no exception to this. There is no modern approach at all,” she told The Sunday Express. “They should be focusing on every emerging technology and the application of new technology. At present, there seems to be only imitative effort. A lot of the research is ineffective. We need reforms in defence research that capitalise on innovation. Good talent needs to be attracted to these organisations.”

In DRDO’s journey from its fetters, it cannot ignore the private sector. The total volume of work undertaken by the private sector since May 2001 amounts to Rs 6,976 crore out of total capital acquisitions worth Rs 95,145.28 crore. Private sector potential in defence R&D is therefore enormous and mostly untapped.

On September 19, members of the Parliamentary Standing Committee received a compilation of the capabilities of just two private companies. Their capabilities officially declared as everything from weapon-launch systems, sea mines, submarines, fire-control systems and special materials to deep water technology, tracking radars, even space applications.

Atul Kirloskar, chairman of the CII’s National Committee on Defence, which played an integral advisory role to the Vijay Kelkar Committee on reforming self-reliance and procurement, told The Sunday Express: “With DRDO, there is a large opportunity to work on technological issues. Raksha Udyog Ratnas, or private sector systems integrators will be certified next year and will be able to make quotes. The new procurement procedure also includes a Make category. There are opportunities waiting.”

In a sense, few would know this better than Lt Gen S S Mehta, formerly Western Army commander and now Director General of CII. He said, “With growing similarities between civilian and military R&D, it is essential that Defence R&D evolve a collaborative structure which adapts to the rapidly changing technology eco-system.”

The journey to a weapons development system like in the US or Europe is still, quite certainly, decades away. But with shifting paradigms, the blurring of technological boundaries and a whole new element to the meaning of self-reliance, the essence of DRDO’s revitalization will be in accepting that the past is just that. The past.

(With Johnson TA in Bangalore)

What lies unread: the recommendations

• Kelkar Committee: streamline linkages with private sector, open up R&D, audit essential

 

• Task Force on Higher Defence Planning: Get senior service officers to head steering committees, let services personnel be part of design teams

• Create a science cadre with mission, goal, good salaries: President Kalam

• New evaluation technology to avoid time and cost overruns: ex-DRDO chief Aatre

• Cut losses, terminate unviable programmes, use resources for new ones, fashion future programmes with foreign partners: Defence Standing Committee

• Focus on emerging technology, innovate, attract best talent: Kiran Mazumdar Shaw

Drdo

Helpless India

1 Comment

To                                                                                                       11th September 2011
The Defence Minister
Room No -104, South Block
New Delhi – 110011

Reference: a)  Your letter No 1409-VIP/RM/2011 dated 21st March 2011

                       b)  Your letter No 1409-VIP/RM/2236 dated 20th May 2011

The bomb blast at gate No -5 of High Court, Delhi has once again proved that we are helpless. The government is helpless, Prime Minister is helpless, Home Minister is helpless that is all agencies responsible for protection of common man is helpless. Right hand does not know what left hand is doing.

Through this website I raised many issues of DRDO, Ministry of Defence, Government of India and found that no concrete action has been taken because Defence Minister is also helpless.

Accountability is missing in each and every level in the DRDO machinery. Accountability is missing therefore unaccountable assets are growing in individuals bank accounts and benami properties etc.

In DRDO there is no accountability at all; SA to RM is holding four posts simultaneously like SA to RM, DG (R&D), Secretary DRDO, Program Coordinator / Chairman Brahmos aerospace Private Limited etc. He  is enjoys the unaccountable money with the help of Dr Vasudeva of SPIC and many more means but not accountable to national security. In Kargil like scenario SA may say that I am helpless because my past predecessors have not fixed the track of development and 30000 strong scientific/technical force whom I am leading does not listen to me, no where it has been written that DRDO is responsible to develop concurrent technology useful for national defence or DRDO is not responsible for developing a system which can go for batch production.

DRDO is using simply the word like (a) Mission Mode (b) Technology Development           (c) Science and Technology basic research. These words have been borrowed simply to justify the annual expenditure which is forcefully granted by defence ministry.

I am not accountable and none my director is are accountable, SA’s punch lines which is maintained by in all labs meticulously. This the vision of DRDO labs for accountability, this culture is followed every effort is made

Directors are free to misuse the government funds as they have to match the exorbitant projected funds for a particular year.

How DRDO is helping the wasting the government funds is narrated by Sh S Ravind, PD, LLR, LRDE Bangalore to CVC, New Delhi.

Regards
Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun-248008
Phone – 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,
E-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com,  prabhu@dandriyal.com 
Website – www.corruptionindrdo.com

Enclosed – letter of Sh S Ravind PD,LLR,LRDE Bangalore

letter of Sh S Ravind PD,LLR,LRDE Bangalore
letter of Sh S Ravind PD,LLR,LRDE Bangalore
Blogspot, Drdo

Who is to blame? – Part –II

1 Comment
Earth revolves round the Sun, Sun rises in the east, sets in the west, both truths are known to humans from the journey of civilizations. Copernicus and Kepler gave the theoretical justification of the above.
In DRDO the Scientists and Technologists also accept the above statements. But as soon as Scientists are given power of Director to lead a laboratory he forgets the above statements that is the Sun is fixed and Earth
revolves, he proposes a new theory after charge assumption as director DRDO, that Earth is fixed and Sun revolves round the Earth and he gives the justification that the Sun’s rotation Sunrises in east and sets in the west.
DRDO directors since beginning of DRDO remain on the post until they retires. As a result they declare themselves the king of a small kingdom. The absolute financial powers, the recruitment power, the demotion power, the demolition power,  he declares himself as unquestionable leader.
 He runs the laboratory and Scientific Adviser to RM feel that whatever is his decision, it must be within the constitutional provision.
As long as directors follow constitutional provisions and understand his responsibilities and accountability, there is no chance of failure in product development because we are having the best manpower in the world.
But the truth of DRDO lab’s director, the day he assumes the charge, immediately crushes / tear off  the whole effort of his predecessor by reorganizing the technical scenario of the lab.  He removes the technical heads, put his own loyal man in that position which may prove the lucrative, put those on whom he has confidence to deal with the financial irregularities can be easily manipulated. The commission and omission the transfer of funds to relatives and friends accounts in the name of via different schemes and grants or business association. Acquiring lands in the name relatives, established friends and relatives firms’s business with his lab  are the important key elements of new director’s in the first phase.  In second phase he plans the foreign trips at least covering five /six countries to study their development efforts in the particular area for which as per charter of duties the works under going on in his lab with hidden agenda to tie up personal links with foreign firms.
Third phase, he take the step to kill enthusiasm of those Scientists who are working from the soul of their heart by sidelining them from real task and assigning them to sundry task. Why because the dedicated scientist and workers never co-operate with his suppliers who are supplying low quality/low quantity stuff to DRDO’s prestigious projects. This is one of the major and foremost reason of delay and failure of DRDO’s project.
This crime remains unnoticed by DRDO Hqrs as the representations are bounce back to individuals. The total efficiency of the lab reduces to 25% and this antinational activity results in to short closing of the projects which has importance for the country defence.
DRDO recently short close 450 such projects. If total cost is considered it’s come in to thousands and thousands crores.
The items imported under such projects are thrown in to scrape and then a new item again procured, some time the gentleman who procured those scrap again supply the item/equipment under new package to DRDO itself and believe it, this is the common gimmick in DRDO. People don’t know because south labs products are supplied in north labs and north labs supplied to south labs, and sometimes item routed through even foreign country.
These things happen because directors are having financial and administrative powers for long period. Now with few years back directors to camouflage their these technical scientific gimmick in defence procurements, remove or degrade or sidelined the UPSC appointed admin allied people  who are well versed with proper procurement process which is duly approved by government of India. They appointed or designated their scientist as head material managements, director management services etc. it is nothing but only the game of corruption. If our government will not look in to this believe me, DRDO will never ever be able to deliver any reliable, trustworthy, indigenous product for our defence forces.
Had the directors been appointed for tenure of three years only on rotation to look after the administration task with standing order from President of India not to interfere the technical program and the program/project directors would have been the financial powers to their program/project requirements.
The DRDO might have written a new chapter on technology development.
The directors are real criminals who justify their failures, incompetence and poor leadership in the name of new technology.
Who is to blame????

Fighting Corruption in DRDO