Tag Archives: administrative

Hyderabad: Colonel arrested for sexual assault

Victim was warned not to inform anyone
DECCAN CHRONICLE.
Published May 17, 2017, 1:54 am IST

Hyderabad: A 44-year-old Army Colonel who sexually assaulted a 19-year-old girl and impregnated her was arrested by Cyberabad Police. Police said Rishi Sharma, serving at Defence Research and Development Organisa-tion (DRDO), assaulted the girl four months back. The issue came to light when her mother found that the girl was pregnant.

According to police, Sharma is deputed as administrative officer at the DRDO Shameerpet unit and residing in the army quarters. The girl’s mother (45) is communication manager in a Central government agency and residing in Upperpally. The woman is separated from her husband and is living with her daughter and son who are studying engineering and intermediate respectively.

Two years back, Rishi met the woman at a function and befriended her. Gradually their friendship grew leading to an illicit relationship. Rishi would come to her home twice a week and would often sleep in the same house. In January, the woman went to visit her ailing mother in Nellore district in AP which Rishi was aware of. After she left, he went to her house and spent some time with the two kids. Later he dropped the son to college on his bike and returned to the flat where the girl was alone.

“He sexually assaulted the girl and warned her not to tell this to anyone, threatening her of dire consequences. Rishi continued to visit the house to meet her mother, but the girl was scared to speak out,” Rajendranagar inspector V. Umender said.

A week back, the girl developed some health complications and was taken to a private hospital. The doctors found that she was pregnant. On questioning by her mother, the girl told her everything. When Rishi came to know that the girl had spoken to her mother, he warned them not to reveal to anybody and threatened to kill them. But the girl’s father came to know about the issue and pressurised the woman to lodge a complaint. Based on her complaint, police registered a case for rape and arrested Sharma on Saturday and sent him to judicial remand. Police have written to the Army authorities about the incident and the arrest.

Sword and Shield

Indian Military Issues: Progress through Debate
Wednesday, April 1, 2015
DRDO: an Organisation in Need of Life Support System                                          (FORCE MARCH 2015) Major General Mrinal Suman

No organisation ever exists in a vacuum. It has to have a purpose, an objective and a mission. The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) is no exception. Its mission statement includes ‘design, develop and lead to production state-of-the-art sensors, weapon systems, platforms and allied equipment for our defence services’; ‘provide technological solutions to the services to optimise combat effectiveness and to promote well-being of the troops’; and ‘develop infrastructure and committed quality manpower and build strong indigenous technology base’.

It is apparent from the above that DRDO has been created solely for the armed forces. As it is funded through the defence budget, the relation between DRDO and the armed forces is akin to that of a service provider to the clients. Therefore, it is the satisfaction level of the armed forces that is a true measure of its performance. Although client satisfaction is an abstract concept and involves a multitude of factors, it is an effective tool to gauge how well the expectations of a client are being met – some of the vital factors being quality of product, timeliness of delivery and value for money (a function of quality and price).

The track record of DRDO is abysmal to say the least. It has never developed any equipment in the promised time-frame and conforming to the parameters. The history of three key projects undertaken by DRDO is a true indicator of the gross inefficiency that afflicts it. Work on the development of the main battle tank Arjun commenced four decades ago in 1974; the LCA project was undertaken in 1983; and the project for the design and development of aero-engines for combat aircraft was started in 1989. DRDO has fared miserably in all the projects. Time and cost overruns have exposed DRDO’s appalling failure.

The concept of client satisfaction becomes irrelevant when a client lacks bargaining power.  The services are a captive client of DRDO.  They are decreed to accept sub-optimal equipment. Ask any soldier and he will tell you that DRDO is the biggest fraud being perpetrated on the nation and is responsible for the current ‘hollow state’ of the Indian armed forces. DRDO is variously described as ‘a white elephant’, ‘a national liability’ and ‘an impediment to the modernisation of the armed forces’.

Resistance to Reforms

Perhaps the most striking attribute of DRDO is its ability to survive and thrive, continued non-performance notwithstanding. For decades, it is being damned for its gross incompetence and failure to deliver. Yet, it continues to expand its empire unabated.  Formed in 1958 as a single unified agency to handle all defence research and development activities with 10 laboratories, it has grown exponentially to 52 laboratories in multiple disciplines. It employs over 5,000 scientists and about 25,000 other scientific, technical and supporting personnel.

To deflect mounting criticism for its failure to develop high tech systems, it has resorted to highlighting production of commonly available products with much hype and fanfare. It boasts of having developed 18.6 meters high self supporting masts and bullet-proof podiums. These items are so commonplace that they are being produced by numerous road-side workshops.

Whereas R&D means invention and innovation, DRDO operates at the pedestrian level of duplication and improvisation. It considers reverse engineering and indigenisation of imported equipment to be the real research work. No wonder it has earned the dubious sobriquet of ‘Defence Replication and Duplication Organisation’.

Worse, due to its failure to develop scientific disposition and nurture an environment of innovations, DRDO has diverted its attention to spreading its domain. A major part of its budget is expended on the creation of world-class auditoriums, convention centres, conference halls and hostels. In other words, DRDO remains overly occupied with non-scientific activities.

Despite all the flak, it continues to flourish. The budget presented on 10 July 14 hiked its allocation from the previous year’s Rs 10,610 crore to Rs 15,283 crore, thereby raising the share of DRDO from the earlier 5 percent to nearly 7 percent of the defence budget now. Most observers felt that such a hike was hardly justified. But then DRDO excels in the management of self-promotion stratagems. It converts every act of inquisition into an opportunity to promote its own interests.

It was in February 2001 that the Group of Ministers on National Security had, in their report submitted to the Prime Minister, had advised DRDO ‘to focus more on core technologies, in which expertise is neither available within the country nor can be procured from alternative sources’. Three reviews followed thereafter and have been recalled here.

  1. a) Censure by the Parliamentary Committee of Defence

The Standing Committee of Defence in its 14th Report had reviewed the functioning of DRDO. It expressed its unhappiness at the non-achievement of indigenisation targets and faulted DRDO for its failure to achieve self-reliance objectives.

The committee noted that scores of DRDO projects were plagued by time and cost overruns. It felt that delays cause suspicion on the capability of DRDO in the eyes of the users, the common man and intelligentsia. It opined that prior to accepting a development project, DRDO should sharpen its foresight to ascertain whether it could develop the required system within a fixed time frame and with available financial/technical resources or not.

The committee expressed its strong disapproval of DRDO venturing into fields unrelated to crucial defence research work and wanted it to concentrate on fundamental R&D for producing systems for strategic requirement of the armed forces. It suggested shedding of research work in the field of life sciences (food, agriculture, medicine, psychology, physical and allied disciplines) to other agencies.

Concerned at the disappointing performance, the committee suggested ‘a thorough review of its functioning and its organisational/structural set up, in order to identify the strength and weaknesses and to improve and strengthen the organisation to increase its efficiency to enable it to achieve organisational goals’. More importantly, it recommended constitution of an independent body of experts/professionals for defence research and development, on the lines of Atomic Energy Commission and Indian Space Research Organization.

  1. b) Kelkar Committee Report

The Kelkar Committee Report of 2005 also recommended that DRDO should fully focus on cutting edge technology researches. It faulted the then existing system of DRDO undertaking indigenous development in respect of all proposals categorised as ‘Make’.  The Committee suggested an integrated approach involving users, Ministry of Defence (MoD) and the industry in the ‘Make’ procedure. It wanted DRDO to confine itself to projects requiring sophisticated technology of strategic, complex and security sensitive nature. It further recommended outsourcing of high technology research and development work to private sector on the lines of parallel development on cost-sharing basis.

Consequent to the acceptance of the Kelkar Committee recommendations, ‘Make’ cases were further sub-categorised in Defence Procurement Procedure – 2006, as follows:-

  • Strategic, Complex and Security Sensitive Systems’. These projects are to be managed through Defence R&D Board, following DRDO procedure and utilising DRDO funds for execution.
  • Low Technology Mature Systems’. These projects are to be treated as ‘Buy Indian’, albeit with minimum 50 per cent indigenous content.
  • High Technology Complex Systems’. In a generic sense, projects under this category should be identified as ‘Make’ cases. These are to be undertaken by the Indian industry. All upgrade programmes categorised as ‘Make’ will also follow this procedure.

As is apparent, the role of DRDO was considerably curtailed and restricted to the development of ‘strategic, complex and security sensitive’ systems only. Development of lesser systems was taken out of the purview of DRDO. With reduced mandate, a reduction in the bloated organisation of DRDO was expected.

  1. c) Rama Rao Committee Report

Consequent to the dissatisfaction expressed by the Parliamentary Committee and the acceptance of the Kelkar Committee Report, MoD set up a committee under the chairmanship of Dr P Rama Rao in February 2007 ‘to review the present organisational structure and to recommend necessary changes in the institutional, managerial, administrative and financial structures for improving the functioning of DRDO’. It was to be the first ever external review of DRDO.

The committee recommended the following measures:-

  • Establishment of a Defence Technology Commission with the Defence Minister as its Chairman.
  • Decentralisation of DRDO management.
  • Making DRDO a leaner organisation by merging some of the DRDO laboratories with other public funded institutions with similar discipline, interest and administrative system.
  • Engagement of an eminent Human Resource (HR) expert as consultant to revamp the entire HR structure of DRDO.
  • Establishment of a commercial arm of DRDO.

In June 2009, a committee under the chairmanship of the Defence Secretary was tasked to study the committee report and the comments received from various stake holders; and evolve a set of acceptable recommendations. On the acceptance of the recommendations of the Defence Secretary by the government, restructuring of DRDO was announced by MoD in mid-May 2010.

The Art of Converting Adversity into Opportunity

As seen above, DRDO has been getting flak for neglecting its primary task of producing state-of-the-art equipment for the armed forces and squandering scarce defence budget on totally unrelated activities like producing ‘Namkeen Herbal Tea’, juices/creams and breeding angora rabbits. Appearing before the Parliamentary Committee of Defence, the then Defence Minister had conceded that ‘DRDO should mainly concentrate on high-end research, particularly in critical and strategic areas’. It showed that the government had agreed with the views of all the review committees that DRDO should not waste its efforts on non-defence fields.

One cannot help marvel at the dexterity with which DRDO has managed the complete gamut of much-hyped reforms. There is nothing in the approved restructuring plan to suggest that any thought has been given to improve R&D performance of the organisation. All critical recommendations made by the above mentioned committees have been ignored.  On the contrary, DRDO has managed to have its way by making selective use of the recommendations to convert an adversity into a blessing to further its own organisational interests.

The approved restructuring plan makes interesting reading. In addition to setting up the new Defence Technology Commission, decentralisation of DRDO management is to be achieved through the formation of seven centres based on functionalities and technology domain of laboratories. Each centre is to be headed by a Director General. The present Director General of DRDO is to be re-designated as Chairman, DRDO.

Leaving aside token shedding of three laboratories, not a single measure suggests any radical reform. Net result of the above restructuring is nil. On the contrary, seven new posts of Director Generals at centres have been created, making the organisation more top-heavy and bureaucratic. Every centre will now have a Centre Headquarters with subordinate staff and secretarial support. Director of a laboratory will not be able to approach DRDO Headquarters directly as another link in the form of centre has been interposed. Decision- making will get further delayed.

Mastery of Survival Technique

It is indeed surprising that an organisation that consumes considerable national resources, delves in mediocre research work, fails to upgrade defence technological base in the country and impedes modernisation of the armed forces can survive for the last six decades. More shocking is the fact that the government is fully aware of the failure of DRDO to deliver but is unable to muster enough courage to force reforms. DRDO adroitly uses the catchphrase of self-reliance for the furtherance of its own agenda.

The secret of DRDO’s continued survival and expansion lies in the patronage that it cultivates. It keeps key functionaries happy through extensive networking. Many consider DRDO to be the ‘bankers to MoD’. Due to the flexibility of its procedure, DRDO is in a position to oblige other wings of MoD by providing facilities from its sources. DRDO is often asked to bear expenditure for many events under the façade of becoming co-sponsors. To silence criticism from the armed forces, it has started dangling the carrot of post-retirement employment as adviser/consultant to senior service officers, especially the Vice Chiefs.

Another aspect that needs mention is the prevailing ‘Old Boys Club’ culture. No one ever retires in DRDO. Persons who contributed little during their active service life are allowed to subsist on the defence budget for years after retirement as well. Extensions and re-employments are routine. Although it prevents infusion, retention and blossoming of young talent, DRDO hierarchy remains totally unconcerned.

One marvels at the deftness with which DRDO has withstood all the criticism heaped on it by various committees. Instead of succumbing to their pressure, it has cleverly exploited their reports to consolidate its powers further and create additional vacancies at senior levels.

Conclusion

DRDO has earned the dubious distinction of being India’s most inefficient, sloth and wasteful organisation. There is hardly any other organisation in the country that has failed the nation so very appallingly. Many consider DRDO to be beyond redemption and suggest it’s winding up. But that will be an imprudent step. Neither the massive infrastructure built over the years nor the technical pool gathered should be wasted.

The new government has already displayed its resolve to improve matters. It has removed DRDO head. Now is the time to crack the whip to force comprehensive reforms. As mandated in the new procurement procedure, DRDO should be forced to concentrate exclusively on strategic, complex and security sensitive systems, especially those which are likely to be circumscribed by denial regimes. DRDO must never forget that it exists exclusively for the development of defence technologies.

It should be made a leaner and focused body. All laboratories engaged in unrelated activities must be shed. Manpower policies must be corrected to acquire a younger profile. No one should be granted extensions. Young talent must be retained through better career prospects and freedom of professional pursuits. As desired by the Prime Minister, some laboratories must be headed by bright young scientists.

Additionally, DRDO must be subjected to performance audit regularly. It should be held responsible for the claims that it makes. Certain failures and delays are inherent in all R&D works and must be accepted as justified risks. However, DRDO must not be able to get away with tall claims which it knows are totally outside the realm of possibility. Finally, a strong accountability system is indispensable. It not only raises the bar of efficiency but also breeds a culture of responsibility.*****  

 

Major General Mrinal Suman
Major General Mrinal Suman

A highly qualified and experienced officer, General Suman commanded an Engineer Regiment in the Siachen Glacier area and was awarded the gold medal for being ‘the most outstanding engineer of the year’. He was the Task Force Commander at Pokharan and was responsible for designing and sinking shafts for the nuclear tests, for which he was duly honoured by the President of India. He superannuated in 2003. He heads Defence Technical Assessment and Advisory Service of CII and has also been directing their much acclaimed Defence Acquisition Management Courses, both in India and abroad. Being the first Technical Manager [Land Systems], he was closely associated with the evolution of the new defence procurement mechanism. Today, he is considered to be India’s foremost expert on myriad aspects of India’s defence procurement regime and offsets. He is a prolific writer and his articles are regularly published in a large number of journals. He is regularly invited to address various chambers, industrial delegations and seminars in India and abroad. He is often consulted by the policy makers. His views are also sought by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence.

An old age problem -DRDO has become ageing body with top scientists on extension

For a country that boasts of one of the youngest populations in the world, it is strange that the field that perhaps deals with the most cutting-edge technology is dominated by scientists past their prime. Most top scientists at the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) who are tasked with creating future weapons are past the retirement age of 60 and are on service extensions.

Indeed, such is the state of affairs that the head of the research organisation, which encompasses 54 establishments and labs dealing with fields as diverse as ballistic missile defence and insect repellent cream, will get an 18-month contractual tenure from November when he turns 64, the maximum age till which service extensions can be given. This extraordinary contract, beyond the remit of extensions, was specially approved by the previous UPA government more than a year in advance for the present DRDO Chairman Avinash Chander.

Though not new, the old age crisis of the lumbering organisation has worsened as private sector prospects have brightened for young scientists. Internal surveys have found that nearly 87 per cent of the young scientists who join DRDO soon get disenchanted with the archaic, rigid structure of the research body that does not reward extraordinary performance with proportional career growth. Annual intake of new scientists has dropped to just 70, barely enough to replace those who take early retirement, thereby, rapidly increasing DRDO’s age profile.

It is still early to judge the Narendra Modi Government’s policies, but the perception that it is taking a strong stand on the issue has brought cheer to hundreds of young scientists itching to prove their worth in DRDO’s labs across India. A series of events, from the Prime Minister’s remark on promoting young scientists to the cabinet secretariat’s stinging order curbing DRDO’s unilateral age extensions to its scientists, have raised hopes that the problem is finally being addressed.

It’s about time, too. As many as 10 of the 16 top DRDO scientists are on extension. Apart from Chander, nine of the top-graded `Distinguished Scientists should have retired, but most are now on their second extension.

Rules mandate that DRDO scientists must retire at 60. They can, however, be given two two-year extensions under,extraordinary circumstances. Beyond the age of 64, there is no provision for service extension. Yet, the UPA government, in May 2013, approved an Appointments Committee of the Cabinet note to give an 18-month extension to Chander following his “date of retirement of 30.11.2014 on contract basis, with the same terms and conditions as he would be entitled to before the date of retirement”.

By doing this, the UPA went back on its promise to appoint a younger head to DRDO. (Both V.K. Saraswat and M. Natarajan, who preceded Chander, retired at 64.) The special provision made for Chander has become the subject matter of several complaints, the latest by one of DRDO’s own, younger scientists to the cabinet secretariat in August. “The post-retirement contract is not legal and has been made against the rules. A contractual employee can be taken for an advisory role but not to head an organisation,” Navin Gupta, the Kanpur-based DRDO Scientist ‘C’, said in his complaint.

While a convincing argument can be made that age is no criterion for innovation and that experience and continuity is needed to deal with certain technology areas, most scientists on extension in the DRDO are handling primarily administrative positions- from most director generals at the headquarters to the heads of six of DRDO’s 54 labs and establishments.

The impact of the extensions policy on DRDO’s talent pool is immense: an internal survey found that most of its entry-level scientists are unhappy about their career prospects and some 57 per cent of all scientists leave the organisation prematurely due to lack of professional satisfaction. Since 2008, nearly 500 entry and mid-level scientists have resigned or taken early retirement while intake of new scientists has barely kept pace. At a seminar on August 20, Chander admitted this was a problem that required urgent attention. “DRDO’s annual intake of young scientists has dipped to 70 per year, resulting in a rapidly rising average age which certainly is not a good sign for an innovation-centric organisation,” he said. The average age of DRDO scientists is creeping closer to 40.

When Modi, speaking immediately after Chander at the same function, said that at least five DRDO labs should only employ scientists under 35, it was the first indication that his Government was addressing the problem. Many thought that the PM picked the number, five, randomly, unaware that it had come from the most in-depth review of the DRDO ever done.

The review, conducted by the Rama Rao Committee in 2008, had identified five labs working in critical fields such as solid state physics, metallurgy, cryptology and lasers for ‘empowered‘ status in order to give them the liberty to quickly induct young talent, bypassing the cumbersome selection process.

The voluminous report suggested other far-reaching reforms, but the UPA government never fully implemented it. The new Government has dusted it and top officials are studying its recommendations. These include revamping the human resource structure to enable DRDO to hire talent from outside, including Indians working abroad, for key technologies; identifying a set of ’empowered labs’ that have the freedom to hire and fire scientists; lowering the age of entry of talent; and looking abroad for key innovators. “A balance has to be struck. The optimised path may be being selective in granting extensions for specific research projects and not for administrative roles,” says Air Marshal Ajit Bhavnani (retd), who was a member of the review committee.

As for the old age issue, one of the first things the Modi regime has done, at least, is get the cabinet secretariat to issue a terse circular on September 26, directing DRDO to stop the practice of unilaterally granting age extensions to its scientists without the approval of the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet, which is headed by the Prime Minister. Sources say extensions have been put on hold and all such future requests would be critically examined. Whether the Government is firm in this resolve will be tested by the upcoming grant of a contract extension to the DRDO chairman.

India Today
India Today
  DRDO Chairman Avinash Chander with Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
DRDO Chairman Avinash Chander with Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

 

Two top DRDO scientists awarded jail term by Madras high court for contempt of court

A Subramani,TNN | Sep 25, 2014, 02.00 PM IST

CHENNAI: While the science community behind Mangalyaan’s success is still basking in glory, the Madras high court on Thursday awarded a three-week jail term to the nation’s two top scientists for contempt of court. The court also imposed a fine on them and directed the Centre to initiate stringent action against the duo.

V K Saraswat, scientific adviser to the minister of defence and director general of research & development, DRDO, and G Malakondaiah, director of Defence Metallurgical Research Laboratory (DMRL) in Hyderabad, have to surrender to police in a week and start their three-week jail stint. If they fail to do so, an arrest warrant shall be issued to get them under custody, ruled an irate division bench of the high court.

“The government is directed to take appropriate departmental action against them for the reckless negligence and wilful disobedience of the orders of this court,” said the bench of Justice S Rajeswaran and Justice P N Prakash on Thursday.

The two DRDO officers were found guilty of civil contempt under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. They were sentenced to a simple imprisonment for three weeks and directed to pay a fine of Rs 2,000 each.

“We are aware that they are occupying very high positions in the government, but ensconced in a pedestal, their vision became blurred when it came to the travails of an ordinary employee who was suddenly thrown out of employment, for no fault of his. Even during the course of the contempt proceedings, there was no tinge of remorse or an attempt to correct the mistake,” the court said.

On August 13, 1985, Joseph Raj was appointed clerk-cum-store keeper initially on an ad hoc basis in the Combat Vehicles Research and Development Establishment (CVRDE) under the ministry of defence. He acquired his B.Com and master of library and information science degrees later, and when a librarian post fell vacant in the school, he was selected on merits. CVRDE School, started at Avadi here in 1978, was sought to be closed in 2001 and staff members were issued termination notices.

Since then, Joseph Raj won several rounds of litigations in the administrative tribunal, the high court and then in the Supreme Court as well. As he was not reinstated or given job in another unit, he then filed the present contempt of court proceedings, pointing out that the authorities had misled even the apex court.

Narrating the travails of Joseph Raj in detail and convinced that the two officers had done everything to deny him employment for more than a decade, the judges directed the Centre to give a job to Joseph Raj according to the 2004 judgment that favoured him.

It also rapped the two top DRDO officers quoting the Supreme Court’s words: “Non-acceptance of a mistake is not a heroic deed. On the contrary, it reflects flawed devotion to obstinacy. The pink of perfection really blossoms in acceptance.”

Exclusive: Whistleblower DRDO officer sacked for highlighting corruption

Posted By M.Sreedhar On November 3rd, 2012 08:52 PM | General News HYDERABADDAILYNEWS.COM

The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) on Thursday took the unprecedented action of sacking an officer who claimed to be a whistleblower . Senior administrative officer Prakash Singh, posted at the Defence Science Centre at Metcalfe House in North Delhi, was served with compulsory retirement order.

Singh was due to retire on December 31, 2023. But a DRDO team visited his house at Timarpur and pasted the retirement notice on the wall. Sources said Singh, who had taken leave from work on medical grounds, was not at home at that time.

Singh plans to challenge the move in court. He claimed the action against him was taken by officiating DRDO head H. Selvamurthy in the absence of scientific advisor to the Defence Minister, V.K. Saraswat, who is on leave.

Serving compulsory retirement notice is the harshest punishment that can be given to a government servant.

DRDO sources said the action was taken strictly in adherence to the government rules. The administrative officer is responsible for the functioning of a laboratory, but Singh had remained absent from work for two years in his previous assignments, they alleged.

The sources said Singh had a history of non-performance and trouble making. He had made complaints against his seniors in the past which were found to be false, they added.

However, reliable sources said Singh was ‘punished’ for highlighting widespread corruption in DRDO. The officer had filed a complaint with the CBI against three senior functionaries: Manas Kumar Mandal (director, institute of psychological research), Dr Anil Kumar Maini (director, Laster Science and Technology Centre) and Dr Arun Kumar (director, personnel, at the headquarters). The CBI referred his complaint to the vigilance department of DRDO.

One of these officers – Arun Kumar – was indicted in a recruitment scam by the Central Vigilance Commission that recommended penalty against him in August. But the DRDO inquiry dismissed the charges of irregularities levelled against the three officials and recommended disciplinary action against Singh for making false complaints.

Punished for highlighting corruption?’ DRDO officer ‘who knew too much’ sacked

By GAUTAM DATT PUBLISHED: 20:51 GMT, 2 November 2012 Mail Today

The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) on Thursday took the unprecedented action of sacking an officer who claimed to be a whistleblower.

Senior administrative officer Prakash Singh, posted at the Defence Science Centre at Metcalfe House in North Delhi, was served with compulsory retirement order.

Singh was due to retire on December 31, 2023. But a DRDO team visited his house at Timarpur and pasted the retirement notice on the wall. Sources said Singh, who had taken leave from work on medical grounds, was not at home at that time. Singh plans to challenge the move in court.

Building of Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) office in New Delhi, India

He claimed the action against him was taken by officiating DRDO head H. Selvamurthy in the absence of scientific advisor to the defence minister, V.K. Saraswat, who is on leave.

Serving compulsory retirement notice is the harshest punishment that can be given to a government servant. DRDO sources said the action was taken strictly in adherence to the government rules.

The administrative officer is responsible for the functioning of a laboratory, but Singh had remained absent from work for two years in his previous assignments, they alleged.

The sources said Singh had a history of non-performance and trouble making.

He had made complaints against his seniors in the past which were found to be false, they added.

However, reliable sources said Singh was ‘punished’ for highlighting widespread corruption in DRDO.

The officer had filed a complaint with the CBI against three senior functionaries: Manas Kumar Mandal (director, institute of psychological research), Dr Anil Kumar Maini (director, Laster Science and Technology Centre) and Dr Arun Kumar (director, personnel, at the headquarters).

The CBI referred his complaint to the vigilance department of DRDO. One of these officers – Arun Kumar – was indicted in a recruitment scam by the Central Vigilance Commission that recommended penalty against him in August.

But the DRDO inquiry dismissed the charges of irregularities levelled against the three officials and recommended disciplinary action against Singh for making false complaints.

Hurting DRDO’s autonomy

R SUNDARAM The Hindu Business Line

The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) is in the news. First, the good news. It successfully test-fired nuclear-capable Agni III long range missile with a strike range of 3,000 km from the Wheeler Islands off the coast of Odisha, recently. This is a major achievement both for the DRDO and the country’s defence capability.

Now, for the bad news. DRDO’s financial and administrative powers have been whittled down or taken away. This is a blow for science and technology efforts in India.

SUDDEN ABOUT-TURN

Only two years ago, in 2010 to be precise, the delegation of powers to the DRDO was considerably liberalised. It seemed as though the government was, for once, serious about freeing scientific establishment from the proverbial red tape.

It allowed DRDO the discretion to spend up to Rs 50 crore with the concurrence of its financial advisor. It appears that a recent action of the DRDO, of approving a design and development project of Rs 49.82 crore for optical sensors to be used in unmanned aerial vehicles and airborne platforms without involving the Ministry, irked the authorities. So, the MOD has “clipped the wings” of the DRDO by re-imposing old controls.

This is a retrograde step engineered by the combined heavy hands of the entrenched babus in administration and accounts, blessed by an unenlightened and short-sighted political leadership. This flies in the face of various pronouncements of the Prime Minister during his various addresses to the scientific community.

In February 2012, Manmohan Singh in an interview to the Science magazine stated that “we need to do much more to change the face of science in India”.

I do not know if this is the change he wanted — imposing more rigorous accounting controls and stifling administrative procedures, so that DRDO becomes yet another run-of-the-mill government organisation.

Recently, the Prime Minister wanted Indian scientists “to seek newer frontiers of research, match capabilities of peers around the world and help India leapfrog”, even as one of his Cabinet ministers was busy belittling the scientific community under his watch.

COMPETENT AUTHORITY

From whatever can be gleaned from news reports, it appears that the recent decisions are based on a special audit conducted by the Controller General of Defence Accounts (CGDA) as ordered by the Minister. It is not clear as to how the CGDA can be considered competent to evaluate R&D activities. There are any number of forums to evaluate programmes and priorities, including peer group assessments, the Standing Committees and Consultative Committees of Parliament on defence.

Only a few years ago, we had the Rama Rao committee going into aspects of revamping defence research and development. So far, no one knows what the recommendations are, and how far these have been implemented.

Time and again, the government, particularly the MOD, tends to shoot itself in the foot by demoralising and insulting both military and civilian organisations under its fold.

(The author is former Member, Ordnance Factories)

(This article was published on October 1, 2012)

DRDO lab seals suspect’s workstation

Deccan Chronicle 

September 1, 2012 By B.R. Srikanth | S.V. Krishna Chaitanya DC Bengaluru/Mysore

The top brass at the Centre for Airborne Systems (CABS) moved swiftly to seal the computer used by terror suspect Aijaz Ahmed Mirza, one of the 11 men arrested Thursday for links to banned terror groups HUJI and LeT.

Documents found on his table were stored with the computer in the organisation’s confidential room.

Scientists at CABS were reportedly shocked about Mirza’s links with LeT and HuJI as the engineering graduate who joined CABS as a junior research fellow in January 2012, was appointed after his antecedents were verified by local police.

Relieved officials said Mirza, who went home to Hubli ahead of Eid-ul-Fitr, did not get a chance to check out the modified Embraer jet, acquired by the organisation to serve as the platform for made-in-India eye-in-the-sky, airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) system, which is now parked in the hangar of CABS.

DRDO: Mirza had no access to sensitive info

The Defence Research and Development Organisation clarified on Friday that Aijaz Mohd Mirza, one of the 11 terror suspects arrested, was not an engineer or a scientist, with access to sensitive information that could prove a threat to national security.

Dr W. Selvamurthy, Chief Controller, R&D (Life Sciences), DRDO, said Mirza was a low cadre temporary recruit, who was appointed as Junior Research Fellow (JRF) on a two-year contract in January, 2012 at the Centre for Airborne Systems which didn’t deal with sensitive information.

“This is the first time in the history of the DRDO that an insider has been arrested for suspected terror links. It came as a shock to the entire organisation. Generally, all top scientists, engineers and other officials of the technical and administrative divisions of the DRDO and offices are monitored by the Central Intelligence Bureau (IB). It’s one of those stray incidents,” he said.