Tag Archives: Central Vigilance Commission

Complaint to CVC – DMSRDE FUME HOOD PROCUREMENT CASE

To                                                                                                          
Central Vigilance Commissioner,
Central Vigilance Commission,
Satarkta Bhawan, A- Block, GPO Complex, INA
New Delhi-110023
 

SUBJECT: Corruption in procurement of Fume Hoods in DMSRDE Kanpur Officers involved in Procurement

  1. Sh. A.S. Parihar, Scientist ‘D’ – Indenter
  2. Sh. Shielendra Kumar, Scientist ‘E’ Head Estate & Work Division and also MMG division both.
  3. Dr. AK Saxena, Director & CFA
  1. Defence Materials & Stores Research & Development Establishment (DMSRDE), Kanpur is an establishment under Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO), Min. of Defence, DRDO Bhawan, New Delhi.
  2. DRDO’s Director Material Management distributed to all Labs & Establishments a manual named “DRDO Purchase Management -2006” which was duly approved by President of India and with the concurrence of Ministry of Defence (Fin/R&D) vide their ID No 752/IF (R&D) dated 20 March 2006.
  3. “DRDO Purchase Management -2006”  page no 12,  para 4.5.2 stated     Directors of Labs/Estts will observe adequate caution while working out detailed specifications of an intended procurement that these are not tailor made to suit a particular brand of product. Broad coverage of the functional performance and environmental parameters will be spelled out in the specifications to allow competition. For this purpose a computer-based data bank of similar products, along with broad specifications will be maintained and updated frequently so as to facilitate fair competition in purchases.
  4. The following case of procurement of Fume Hoods is totally violated procurement rules laid down by DRDO.
    • Tailor made specification was made and brand name as well as model number mentioned in tender inquiry.
    • Make cannot be mentioned in demand only item can be purchased whichever is having lowest prise. So he can purchase a branded item of particular firm unless it is propitiatory item. Bio base is Chinese Company so how they decided to purchase that brand when several manufactures and brands of Fume Hood were available in the Market
    • Item was purchased by Estate & Works Division, This division cannot indent & purchase Fume hood as this division is only for maintenance of Buildings & Govt accommodation.
    • Purchased qty 14 because the total price comes under fifty lakh which was within the limit of Director’s purchase power. Purchase Rules was violated as case was so designed that cost remain below 50 Lakhs (the Financial Power of Director)
    • Purchased exorbitant price because the same item is available in open market @ 1350 $ and dollar rate of date of supply order (19 November 2013) was Rs 62.26.
    • Open Market cost of  Fume Hood Chamber (Make- Biobase, Shandong Model- FH-1200 C) $1350 X 62.26 ( Dollar Rate on 19 Nov 2013 ) = Rs 84051.00
    • Fume Hood Chamber (Make- Biobase, Shandong Model- FH-1200 C) was purchased @ 290540.00 and Quantity 14 was purchased total amount Rs. 45,76,005.00. (With Tax)
    •  Actual cost of 14 no of Fume Hood Chamber (Make- Biobase, Shandong Model- FH-1200 C) Rs 84051.00 X 14 = Rs. 1176714.00
    •  Purchased exorbitant price by DMSRDE – Rs 290540.00 x 14 = Rs 4067560.00
    •  Total loss of poor tax payers Rs 4067560.00 – Rs. 1176714 = Rs 2890846.00 

FUME HOOD PROCUREMENT CASE

DMSRDE Fume Hood Demands Detailsfume demand   Demand Under worksfume demand under works DMSRDE, Kanpur Tender Details fume tender  DMSRDE, Kanpur placed Supply Order to KAN-THT (INDIA) Pvt. Ltd., Delhi to procure the item  details of which given below.fume supply order 5.   The facts stated above, it is amply crystal clear that prima facie material regarding Abuse of Authority by arrogant and corrupt administrator Dr. A. K. Saxena, Director DMSRDE exists.

6.    In view of the above mentioned facts and evidences it is earnestly requested that an order for through investigation of all procurement done by Dr. Arvind Kumar  Saxena after assuming charge as Director, DMSRDE, DRDO, Kanpur to stop further corruption and wastage of poor tax payers money.

Prabhu Dandriyal                                                                   22 January 2014
21-Sunderwal, Raipur, Dehradun -248008                                                                              
0135-2787750 – 91-9411114879
Email-prabhudoon@gmail.com,  www.corruptionindrdo.com
 

 

Annexure  – 1. Quotation  of  Fume Hood Chamber (Make- Biobase, Shandong Model- FH-1200 C)fume quotation
 

CORRUPTION IN PROCUREMENT OF ANALYTICAL WEIGHING BALANCE AT DMSRDE KANPUR

           

To
Central Vigilance Commissioner,
Central Vigilance Commission,
Satarkta Bhawan, A- Block, GPO Complex, INA
New Delhi-110023

SUBJECT: SCAM TAINTED PROCUREMENT OF ANALYTICAL WEIGHING BALANCE IN DMSRDE, KANPUR 

 COMPLAINT AGAINST

  1. MR. AMIT SARAIYA, SCIENTIST ‘D’, HEAD MATERIALS MANAGEMENT GROUP (2011-2013),
  2. MR. SHIELANDRA KUMAR  SCIENTIST ‘E’, HEAD MATERIALS MANAGEMENT GROUP (2013),
  3. MR.R K JAIN, SCIENTIST ‘E’ CHAIRMAN, ‘VENDOR REGISTRATION COMMITTEE’
  4. DR. D. N. TRIPATHI, CHAIRMAN, ‘TECHNICAL EVALUATION COMMITTEE’(TEC)
  5. DR. T. C. SHAMI, CHAIRMAN, ‘STORES PRUCHASE COMMITTEE’(SPC)
  6. DR. ARVIND KUMAR SAXENA, DIRECTOR & CFA, DMSRDE, KANPUR

Sir,

BRIEF FACTS OF THE COMPLAINT 

  1. Defence Materials & Stores Research & Development Establishment (DMSRDE), Kanpur is an establishment under Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO), Min. of Defence, DRDO Bhawan, New Delhi.
  1. Purchase Management 2006 is applicable for procurement of store items in DRDO. Gross irregularities and violation of Purchase Management 2006 was made in procurement of Analytical Weighing Balance in year 2012-2013 when the cases were indented by officers of Material Management Group under illegal orders of Head MMG & Dr. A. K. Saxena, Director, DMSRDE.
  1. Dr. A K Saxena Director is an incompetent, arrogant and corrupt administrator who has not only violated but also subverted all rules and regulations of purchase.  In earlier complaints pending with Central Vigilance Commissioner at New Delhi and now in the present case, it becomes amply clear that he is the not only the ‘CENTRE OF GRAVITY’ but also ‘PATRON-IN-CHIEF’ of corruption menace in DMSRDE.  Relevant rules and regulation of DRDO PURCHASE MANUAL-2006 for the execution of procurement are a mentioned below:
  • Para 4.6.2 of DRDO purchase manual 2006 Corrigendum 03 clearly  states: 4.6.2 For demands for stores above Rs 5 lakh, the level for initiation for putting up to SPC/DRDO HQrs/ various committees with delegated powers under various programmes and projects will be as under: (a) Above Rs 5 lakh to Rs 25 lakh: initiation by Scientist ‘C’/ TO ‘C’ and above, countersigned by project or group head. (b) Above Rs 25 lakh to Rs 50 lakh: initiation by Scientist ‘D’/ TO ‘D’ and above, countersigned by project or group head. (c) Above Rs 100 lakh and above: initiation by Scientist ‘E’ and above, countersigned by project or group head.
  • Para 5.1.1 of DRDO PURCHASE MANUAL 2006 clearly states that  following cautions shall be observed for purchasing stores:
  • Bulk purchases will normally fetch quantity discount. This should, however, not lead to over-stocking resulting in expiry of shelf life or redundancy due to obsolescence.
  • Purchase orders will not be split-up to avoid the necessity for obtaining sanction of the higher authorities.
  • Open tendering should be adopted to ensure fair competition, unless it is considered expedient to follow other modes of tendering due to urgency. Purchases will be made from the lowest acceptable tenderer. Adequate care would be exercised to ensure that delivery from the vendor is within the specified time schedule.
  • Para  7.6 Corrigendum 02 of DRDO PURCHASE MANUAL 2006 clearly states: LIMITED TENDERS: This mode of tendering may be chosen when estimated value of goods to be procured is up to Rs. 25 lakh (Rupees Twenty five lakh).  Purchase through Limited Tender Enquiry may also be adopted even where the estimated value of the procurement is more than Rs 25 lakh, in the following circumstances as per the delegated financial powers in vogue.

(a)  When the sources of supply are definitely known and are limited.

(b)  When it is not in the public interest to call for open tenders due to reasons of security or when superior authorities have issued specific instructions in this regard.

(c)  When Government policies designate specific agencies.

(d)  When open tender system adopted during previous one year has established sufficient and assured sources of supply at competitive rates.

(e)  When the requirement of stores is urgent and the desired delivery schedule cannot be met if open tenders are invited, the indenting officer must place on record, the nature of the urgency and why the demand could not be anticipated earlier. Urgency of such cases will be specifically monitored till the placement of order.

(f)   EPC approval issued by DMM in all cases shall include the names of the vendors to whom the Tender enquiries must necessarily be sent in addition to others.

  • Para 7.6.3 of DRDO purchase manual 2006 clearly  states:The limited tender enquiries will be floated to all registered firms with a minimum of seven such firms for the concerned item(s). In a case where the number of registered firms is less than seven, these enquiries will be issued to all known firms dealing with the stores and efforts made in this regard will be recorded on the file”. Corrigendum 03 clearly  states: “Add: at the end of the para 7.6.3Vendor selection for the purpose of Limited Tender enquiries must be done with utmost diligence so as to give fair opportunity to all known vendors who are willing and eligible for consideration. The enlistment and delisting of registered vendors should be based on clearly laid down criteria and the existing provision for buildup followed rigorously  by periodically referring to vendors registered with R&D Labs/ Estt., DGS&D, NSIC, other Government  Departments and to the firms of national repute who will be registered before their bid is considered.”
  • Para 7.13.3 of DRDO purchase manual 2006 clearly  states: Scrapping of tenders will be resorted to in the following cases with the approval of the Director:
    • Change in basic specifications governing supplies after opening of tenders.
    • Non-receipt of offers as per specifications laid down.
    • Sudden downward market trend.
    • Prices quoted being very high/unreasonable.
    • Large/manifold variation in tendered prices.
    • Para 3.2 of DRDO purchase manual 2006 clearly  states: REGISTRATION OF VENDORS: The vendors will be registered by Labs/Estts for different categories of stores, e.g., raw materials, chemicals, machine tools, instruments, electronics and electrical items, timber, fabrication jobs and other general stores etc. The credentials of firms seeking registration will be verified to ascertain their credibility with regard to financial standing i.e. annual accounts, capacity, reliability, bonafides (income-tax returns sales tax No. etc.) and past performance, etc. For this purpose, specialists from the respective fields will be included in the Vendor Registration Committee while examining the applications of vendors seeking registration. The registration committee will be appointed for one financial year. The constitution of the vendor registration committee will be as follows:

1. Scientist- F Chairman

2. Scientist- D/E Member

3. Head MMG or Rep Member Secy.

The Chairman can co-opt specialist members if considered necessary.

4.    Mr. Aneesh  Kumar Singh, Scientist ‘C’,  Mr. Amit Sarriya,  Head Material Management Group, Mr. R.K. Jain, Scientist ‘E’ Chairman Vendor Registration Committee Dr. D. N. Tripathi, Scientist ‘F’ Chairman TEC, and Dr. T. C. Shami, Scientist ‘F’, Chairman SPC(above Rs 10 lakh) for    possibly under heavy pressure entered into a criminal conspiracy with Dr. A K Saxena, Director  & CFA of splitting requirement of the same items to fabricate store demands violating  DRDO purchase manual 2006, details of which are mentioned below:

5.    PROCUREMENT IRREGULARITIES OF Analytical Weighing Balance

Central Procurement of Analytical Weighing Balances worth total estimated cost Rs. 52.8 lakh on limited tender basis by splitting requirement into

  • 02 demands raised by Mr. Aneesh Kumar Singh, Scientist C of Material Management Group along with Mr. Amit Sarriya Head MMG, on same date 20th Feb 2013 with exactly same list of pet vendors of Dr. A. K. Saxena, Director , DMSRDE.
  • the 02 demands were cleared by the SPC (Store Procurement Committee) dealing cases above Rs. 10.0 lakh, headed by  Dr.  T C Shami, Scientist ‘F’,  as Chairman of SPC 2012,
  • Technical evaluation of Techno Commercial Bid  in case of Analytical Weighing Balance was done by a TEC comprising of  Dr. D. N. Tripathi, Scientist ‘F’ Chairman TEC, Mr. A. K. Dixit Scientist ‘E’ (Expert Member),  Mr. Aneesh Kumar Singh, Scientist C(User Member) and Mr. A. K. Mishra Technical Officer ‘C’(Member Secretary). Queries were asked from Vendors vide letter dated 19 June 2013 Kawach Instruments & Chem Tex Noida & Abhigyan Traders, Kanpur was  technically disqualified in TEC report for case at Sl. No.01.
  • Respective   supply orders placed during Sep 2013 to Oct 2013.
  • Point to be noted that
    • requirement of “Analytical Weighing Balance” received from various user divisions in response to MMG ION (Annexure-I) was  deliberately split into two demands below Rs. 50.0 Lakh to keep it within the lab director CFA power so as to avoid DRDO HQrs  concurrence. These demands were cleared in same SPC meeting held on 07-Mar-2013 and limited tender enquiries were issued on same date 03-Apr-2013 to exactly similar vendors as shown in Table-I below.
    • Only 06 pet vendors are given tender enquiry whereas  as per para 7.6.3 DRDO purchase manual 2006 the limited tender enquiries will be floated to all registered firms with a minimum of seven such firms for the concerned item(s). Further vendors should be selected in accordance to Para 7.6.3-Corrigendum 03 to DRDO purchase manual 2006.
    • Further vendors selection  for the two demands  at Sl.No.01& 02 is improper as:
      • M/s Nav Jyoti Scientific Sales Corporation Lucknow (Reg. No. DMSRDE_013/01C/19_10L for Chemicals, Instruments) and M/s Kawach Instruments & Chem Tex Noida (Reg. No. DMSRDE_012/03C/073_10L for Chemicals, Instruments, Textiles,) were registered in 2013  for supply orders limited up to Rs 10.lakh then how these vendors were selected for tender inquiry for cases costing above  Rs. 10 Lakh
      • M/s Abhigyan Traders, Kanpur (Reg. No. DMSRDE_07/03C/044 for Chemicals) and M/s National Industrial Corporation (NIC) Kanpur (Reg. No. DMSRDE_11/03C/61 for Chemicals) are registered in DMSRDE only for Chemicals supply then how they were selected for tender inquiry for Scientific Equipment.
      • Demand for such specialized equipment is raised by Material Management Group centrally based on requirements submitted  by user divisions under pressure of Dr. A K Saxena, the Director,  in response to the ION issued by Material Management Group(Annexure-I)  despite no demand was raised from user divisions.
      • there is no requirement for this store in such a huge quantity in DMSRDE as it may be  sufficient to provided such costly and specialized equipment in Central Analytical Facility which is equipped with various special purpose sophisticated costly equipment. This is an attempt to create redundant facilities leading to underutilization of the equipment and this can be treated as wastage of poor tax payers money.

 6.    Point to be noted that

Dr. A. K. Saxena, the Director, has got registered more than fifty of his pet vendors in year 2013 through formulation of an illegal Vendor Registration committee with his pet man Mr. R.K. Jain Scientist ‘E’ as Chairman despite the fact that there are more competent and honest Scientist’s ‘F’ available in DMSRDE who are not only underutilized but not even acknowledged.. This  is a clear cut violation of para3.2 of DRDO purchase manual 2006 by Dr AK Saxena, for placement of the supply  order on limited tender to known vendors clearly exhibit his vested interest through manipulation  in prices, quality etc so as to fetch financial benefits hence indicates financial corruption/ corrupt practices of giving business/ benefits to own firms.

  • Details are as show in Table-1
  • Table-Itable2

Point to be noted

  • For Analytical weighing balance at Sl.no.01
    • As per Para 4.6.2 DRDO purchase manual 2006 Corrigendum 03 Scientist ‘C’ can raise demand up to Rs.  25.0 lakh.
    • This limited tender above Rs 25 lakh violates Para 7.6 DRDO purchase manual 2006 Corrigendum 02.
    • Placement of supply order worth Rs. 30.92 (costing  close to  estimated cost Rs 33.6 lakh) on limited tender basis  to known local/pet vendor M/s Nav Jyoti Scientific Sales Corporation Lucknow, clearly exhibit vested interest through manipulation  in prices, quality etc so as to fetch financial benefits hence indicates financial corruption/ corrupt practices of giving business/ benefits to own firms
  • For Analytical weighing balance at Sl.no.02
    • The Demand for Dual Range High Precision Semi Micro Balance with Density Determination Kit is exorbitantly estimated at the rate of Rs 6.4 Lakh (i.e. Total cost for 03 No. Rs 19.2 Lakh ) as:
  • Similar Semi Micro Dual Range High Precision Analytical Balance with Density Determination Kit was procured by a user division vide demand dated in 08-Aug-11 and supply order dated 19-Dec-2011 at the rate of Rs 1.6 lakh from M/s P.D. Scientific Industries, Kanpur.
  • For a demand estimated Rs.19.2 lakh the supply order costing Rs 9.7 lakh at the rate Rs 3.3 lakh only was placed to lowest bidder M/s Kawach Instruments & Chem Tex Noida.
  • Point to be noted that M/s Kawach Instruments & Chem Tex Noida could not be technically disqualified in this case by the TEC otherwise this supply order also might be costing close to estimated cost Rs 19 lakh as in first case above.  It appears that the first case is exorbitantly estimated too.
    • Item nomenclature is slight changed by changing the location of “Semi Microat Sl. No. 02 & 03 with a view to create a differentiation.  
    • M/s P.D. Scientific Industries Kanpur was not considered for the said tender enquiry otherwise prices might have lowered further in order of case at Sl. No. 03.
    • Scrapping of tenders should be considered in case of sudden downward market trend or Large/manifold variation in tendered prices as per DRDO purchase manual 2006 Para 7.13.3 .

9.      Despite all above placement of the supply  order on limited tender to known vendors clearly exhibit vested interest through manipulation  in prices, quality etc so as to fetch financial benefits hence indicates financial corruption/ corrupt practices of giving business/ benefits to own firms

10.       From the facts stated above, it is amply crystal clear that prima facie material regarding ‘ABUSE OF AUTHORITY’, ‘DICTATORIAL TRAITS ’, ‘PATRONIZATION OF CORRUPTION’ as regards to arrogant and corrupt Dr. Arvind Kumar  Saxena, Director DMSRDE exists.

That he has created a robust cobweb of corruption system’ killed proven departments / institutions in DMSRDE to hold system to ransom. This is evident from the fact that sequentially right from the indenter, head of the Division, whole Stores Purchase Committee including its CHAIRMAN and lastly HEAD MMG have fallen under tremendous pressure into criminal conspiracy to cheat DRDO and exchequer’s money.

In pursuance of the said criminal conspiracy,  Dr. A. K. Saxena, Director, present Head MMG, and Mr. A. K. Singh, Technical Staff Officer of Director, DMSRDE are tampering with evidence / documents that shall be prejudice to fair trial, investigation, trial or any inquiry.

11.      In view of the above mentioned facts and evidences it is earnestly requested that an order for through investigation of all procurement done by Dr.  A. K. Saxena after assuming charge as Director, DMSRDE, DRDO, Kanpur to stop further corruption and wastage of poor tax payers money.

Date: 12th January 2014

Prabhu Dandriyal                                                                                                                          
21-Sunderwal, Raipur, Dehradun -248008                                                                              
0135-2787750 – 91-9411114879                                                                 
prabhudoon@gmail.comwww.corruptionindrdo.com

Annexure- ION Bulk Purchasing of Items – File No TPO/Gen/09/N-8Dated 7/9/2012  table3

 

CORRUPTION IN PROCUREMENT OF DYNEEMA FABRIC AT DMSRDE KANPUR

To                                                                                                          
Central Vigilance Commissioner,
Central Vigilance Commission,
Satarkta Bhawan, A- Block, GPO Complex, INA
New Delhi-110023

SUBJECT: SCAM AND ASTRONOMICAL CORRUPTION IN PROCUREMENT OF DYNEEMA FABRIC IN DMSRDE KANPUR 

COMPLAINT AGAINST

  1. MR. AMIT SARAIYA, SCIENTIST ‘D’, HEAD MATERIALS MANAGEMENT GROUP (2011-2012),
  2. MR. SHIELANDRA KUMAR  SCIENTIST ‘E’, HEAD MATERIALS MANAGEMENT GROUP (2013),
  3. DR. R. K. TIWARI, SCIENTIST, ‘F’, HEAD LIGHT ENGINEERING DIVISION (LED)
  4. DR. D. N. TRIPHATI, ‘F’, HEAD RUBBER AND ADHESIVE DIVISION
  5. MR. AK, SCIENTIST ‘D’ COMPOSITE MATERIAL DIVISION
  6. MR. ARUN KUMAR SINGH, SCIENTIST ‘D’ COMPOSITE MATERIAL DIVISION & TECHNICAL STAFF OFFICER TO DIRECTOR
  7. DR. DARSHAN LAL, CHAIRMAN, ‘STORES PURCHASE COMMITTEE’(SPC)
  8. DR. DARSHAN LAL, CHAIRMAN

Sir,

BRIEF FACTS OF THE COMPLAINT

  1. Defence Materials & Stores Research & Development Establishment (DMSRDE), Kanpur is an establishment under Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO), Min. of Defence, DRDO Bhawan, New Delhi.
  2. Purchase Management 2006 is applicable for procurement of store items in DRDO. Gross irregularities and violation of Purchase Management 2006 was made in procurement of Dyneema Fabric in year 2011-2013 when the cases were indented by officers of Composite Materials Divisions  under illegal orders of Head, LED & Composite Division, Head MMG & Dr. A. K. Saxena, Director, DMSRDE.
  3. Dr. A K Saxena Director is an incompetent, arrogant and corrupt administrator who has violated all the rules and regulations of purchase.  In earlier complaints pending with Central Vigilance Commissioner at New Delhi and now in the present case, it becomes amply clear that he is the ‘CENTRE OF GRAVITY’ of corruption menace in DMSRDE.  Para 5.1.1 of DRDO PURCHASE MANUAL 2006 clearly states that  following cautions shall be observed for purchasing stores:
  • Bulk purchases will normally fetch quantity discount. This should, however, not lead to over-stocking resulting in expiry of shelf life or redundancy due to obsolescence.
  • Purchase orders will not be split-up to avoid the necessity for obtaining sanction of the higher authorities.
  • Open tendering should be adopted to ensure fair competition, unless it is considered expedient to follow other modes of tendering due to urgency. Purchases will be made from the lowest acceptable tenderer. Adequate care would be exercised to ensure that delivery from the vendor is within the specified time schedule.
  1. Mr. R. K Tiwari,  Head Composite Division and also Head Light Engineering Division, Dr. D N. Triphati, Head Rubber and Adhesive Division, Mr. Amit Sariaya, Head MMG (2011-2012), Mr. Shielendra Kumar Accordingly Head MMG (2013), Mr. AK, Scientist ‘D’ and Mr. Arun Kumar Singh, Scientist ‘D’ possibly under heavy pressure entered into a criminal conspiracy with Dr. A K Saxena, Director  & CFA of splitting demands of the same items, details of which are mentioned below:
  2. PROCUREMENT IRREGULARITIES OF DYNEEMA

Dyneema worth total estimated cost of Rs. 1.05 Crore was procured on limited tender basis by splitting requirement

  • 11 demands below Rs.10 lakh (to avoid TPC) were raised during 16 months period (from May 2011 to Sep 2012) which were cleared by the SPC (Store Procurement Committee) dealing cases below Rs. 10.0 lakh, headed by  Dr.  Ashok Ranjan, Joint Director and Mr. Darshan Lal, Joint Director,  as Chairman of SPC 2011 and SPC 2012, Respective   supply orders placed during Aug 2011 to  Aug 2012.
  • One demand raised by Mr. A. S. Parihar and Dr. D.N. Tripathi, Joint Director in Apr 2013 for which supply order is placed on Manglam Traders in July 2013 worth Rs 7.06 Lakh. One demand raised by Mr. Arun Kumar Singh and Dr R. K. Tiwari, Joint Director, in Feb 2013 for which supply order is  placed on SMPP Pvt. Ltd. in Nov 2013 worth Rs 25.8 Lakh.
  • Point to be noted that there is no requirement for this store in such a huge quantity as there is no running project work on Bullet Proof Jacket with DMSRDE.
  • Details are as show in table-1

Table-1ak10

  • Points to be noted that
    • The requirement split into demands below Rs. 10.0 Lakh to avoid TPC and open tender which would have fetched better quality at discounted prices.
    • Further 02 Supply Orders worth Rs 13.5 Lakhs were placed on a pet vendor Mangalam Traders, Kanpur. 02 Supply Orders worth Rs 12.5 Lakhs were placed on a pet vendor Shahi Traders, Kanpur 01 Supply Orders worth Rs 7 Lakhs were placed on a pet vendor Pee Cee Textile Stores Kanpur.
    •  06 supply orders worth Rs 58.5 Lakhs were placed on a pet vendor S M Pulp Packaging Pvt Ltd, a  manufacturer of molded pulp products, protective packaging, presentation packaging and Industrial packaging which turned to an Armour manufacturer over a period of two years  by adding  the armor division through buildup of technical knowhow in the strategic field while working with scientists of DMSRDE Kanpur on development of Bulletproof Jacket.(pls refer website http://smgroupindia.com/pulp-molded-packaging.htm).  SMPP Pvt Ltd was not registered vendor at DMSRDE from 01.01.2011 to July 2013, when the vendor supplied the Dyneema in DMSRDE.. It is interesting to see that BPJ developed by DMSRDE Kanpur is still waiting for a customer where as S M Pulp Packaging Pvt Ltd are established supplier for the same as they claim in the website that there BPJ is certified by HP White USA and TBRL Chandigarh a nodal agency of DRDO for ballistic testing.
    • Further 02 Supply Orders worth Rs 13.5 Lakhs were placed on a pet vendor Mangalam Traders, Kanpur. 02 Supply Orders worth Rs 12.5 Lakhs were placed on a pet vendor Shahi Traders, Kanpur 01 Supply Orders worth Rs 7 Lakhs were placed on a pet vendor Pee Cee Textile Stores Kanpur
    • Placement of these orders on limited tender to non-registered, known/ local vendors clearly exhibit vested interest through manipulation  in prices, quality etc so as to fetch financial benefits hence indicates financial corruption/ corrupt practices of giving business/ benefits to own firms
  • Further interesting statistics out of above is as under
    • 04 demands worth Rs. 25.5 Lakhs were raised on 15th Sep 2011 by Mr. Amit Kumar, posted in Composite Material Division, and Dr. R. K. Tiwari, Joint Director, through Light Engineering Division (LED) with a deliberate attempt to bypass Group Director of Composite Material Division, an honest person Dr. D. K. Setua for the reason that splitting of demand is not permissible as per the guide lines of DRDO’s Purchase Manual 2006.It is important to note that Mr. AK, Scientist ‘D’ is not a part of Light Engineering Division (LED). He is posted in Composite Material Division. How he can indent the cases of LED?
    • Further these demands were cleared in SPC meeting held on 28th Sep 2011 and their tender enquiry was issued on same date 03rd Oct 2011 and very magically all   the 04 No. Supply orders worth Rs. 28.5 Lakhs were fetched by the same firm M/s SMPP Pvt. Ltd. on same date  11th Nov 2011.
    • Placement of these orders on limited tender to M/s SMPP Pvt. Ltd.  clearly exhibit vested interest through manipulation in prices, quality, quantity etc so as to fetch financial benefits hence indicates financial corruption/ corrupt practices of giving business/ benefits to own firms. SMPP Pvt Ltd was not registered vendor of DMSRDE during 2011-2013.
  • In a nutshell point is that out of  Rs 1.05 crore only 02 supply order worth Rs. 16 lakhs were placed on OEM M/s DSM Dyneema BV.  Dyneema is a proprietary item of OEM M/s DSM Dyneema BV and procurement from OEM might have saved around 35% of the cost paid in form of custom duty, local dealer profit and other overheads which comes to Rs 25 to 30 lakhs of loss of poor tax payer’s money.

6.  From the facts stated above, it is amply crystal clear that prima facie material regarding Abuse of Authority by arrogant and corrupt administrator Dr. A. K. Saxena, Director DMSRDE exists.

  • That he has created a robust cobweb of corruption system and that he entered into criminal conspiracy with Chairman’s of two successive SPC committee, Head Composite Division, Head Light Engineering, Head Finance Division  with an intention to cheat DRDO and exchequer’s money.
  • In pursuance of the said criminal conspiracy,  Dr. A K Saxena, Director, present Head MMG,  and Mr. A K Singh, Technical Staff Officer of Director DMSRDE are tampering with evidence / documents that shall be prejudice to fair trial, investigation, trial or any inquiry.

7.    In view of the above mentioned facts and evidences it is earnestly requested that an order for through investigation of all procurement done by Dr. Arvind Kumar  Saxena after assuming charge as Director, DMSRDE, DRDO, Kanpur to stop further corruption and wastage of poor tax payers money.

Date: 09th January 2014

Prabhu Dandriyal                                                                                                                             
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun -248008                                                                              
0135-2787750 – 91-9411114879                                                                 

prabhudoon@gmail.com,   www.corruptionindrdo.com

 

CORRUPTION IN PROCUREMENT OF CHEMICALS AT DMSRDE KANPUR

To                                                                                                          
Central Vigilance Commissioner,
Central Vigilance Commission,
SatarktaBhawan, A- Block, GPO Complex, INA
New Delhi-110023

SUBJECT:      MULTI-CRORE SCAM CORRUPTION IN PROCUREMENT OF CHEMICALS IN DMSRDE KANPUR COMPLAINT AGAINST

  1. MR. AMIT SARAIYA, SCIENTIST ‘D’, HEAD MATERIALS MANAGEMENT GROUP (MMG),
  2. DR. DARSHAN LAL, CHAIRMAN ‘STORES PRUCHASE COMMITTEE’  
  3. Dr. ARVIND KUMAR SAXENA, DIRECTOR, DMSRDE, KANPUR

Sir,

BRIEF FACTS OF THE COMPLAINT

  1. Defence Materials & Stores Research & Development Establishment (DMSRDE), Kanpur is an establishment under Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO), Min. of Defence, DRDO Bhawan, New Delhi.
  2. Purchase Management 2006 is applicable for procurement of store items in DRDO.  Gross irregularities and violation of Purchase Management 2006 was made in procurement of Chemicals in year 2012 when the cases were indented by officers of MMG under threat illegal orders of Head ‘Materials Management Group’ (MMG)& Dr. A K Saxena Director DMSRDE
  3.  Dr. A K Saxena Director is an incompetent, arrogant and corrupt administrator who has violated all the rules and regulations of purchase. In the year 2012 while chairing ‘Head of Divisions’ (HOD) meeting, he directed that all HOD’s shall ensure that all demands of chemicals what-so-ever should be immediately forwarded to Head MMG. Head MMG shall consolidate all the requirements and one order shall be placed to get maximum discount from the suppliers
  4. Accordingly Head MMG circulated a memo requesting for the details of chemicals as per the enclosed format. Now here is where criminal conspiracy starts and instead of placing one consolidated demand, Head MMG & Dr. A K Saxena, Director  & CFA split the orders of various chemicals to the tune of Rs. 2.2 Crores.
  5. Procurement of CHEMICALS

Chemicals worth total estimated cost of Rs.2,19,19,074/-were procured centrally by a single division i.e. Material Management Group on limited tender basis splitting total demand against requirements received from various divisions of lab

  • into 30 cases below Rs.10 lakh(to avoid TPC) during 10 months period(from 12 Oct 2011 to 31 July 2012)
  • these demands were cleared by the same SPC (Store Procurement Committee)  Chairman Darshan Lal Joint Director, and
  • issuing more than 40 supply orders during Apr 2012 to  Dec 2012
  • Point to be noted that only in Month of Oct 2011   22 Demands worth total estimated cost of Rs. 15333034.00 were raised out of which 16 Demands worth total estimated cost of Rs 11471067.00 were cleared in one SPC meeting held on 16th Nov 2011 by SPC (Store Procurement Committee) dealing cases costing less than Rs 10 lakh headedby Chairman Darshan Lal Joint Director. Further it has bypassed the expert higher level SPC (Store Procurement Committee) dealing cases costing more than Rs 10 lakh headed by an honest officer Chairman Dr. DK Setua, Addl. Director having expertise with chemical background who might have not permitted splitting of cases in this manner.
  1. These 30 No. Cases for which at least details up to supply order date(which confirms that supply order is prepared) are mentioned in following tables

Table-1

  • For Sl. 01-03 total estimated cost  is Rs. 2832300.00 and total value of 08 Supply orders is Rs. 2635059.00
  • Point to be noted that
    • These Demand are raised on Limited Tender basis by same indenter officer, on same date 31-Jul-12 ,
    • SPC conducted on 22nd Aug 2012,
    • CFA approval accorded on 05-Sep-12, Tender Enquiry issued on the same date 05-Sep-12, and
    • 08 No Supply orders worth Rs. 2635059.00 are placed on same date 4-Dec-2012.
    • Demands of chemicals vide DMSRDE/13MMG042 & DMSRDE/13MMG041 at Sl.No. 01 and 02 reflect same chemical “Ethylene Di Chloride AR Make: Rankem/SD fine /Qualigens /SRL Each Pack of 2.5 ltr”
    • The requirement of chemicals was split into demands below Rs. 10.0 Lakh to avoid TPC and open tender.
    • DRDO Chemical Rate Contract exists w.e.f. 17th Sep 2012 and placement of these supply orders under the RC would have fetched better quality at discounted prices.
    • Placement of these orders on limited tender to known local vendors ignoring DRDO Chemical RC  clearly exhibit vested interest through manipulation  in prices, quality, pack size etc so as to fetch financial benefits hence indicates financial corruption/ corrupt practices of giving business/ benefits to own firms.chem table1

Table-2

  • For Sl. 04-08 total estimated cost  is Rs. 3422198.00
    • These Demand are raised on Limited Tender basis in December 2011 from 02nd to 31st Dec2011,
    • These Demand are cleared in 05 SPC meetings  conducted over a period of 45 days from  21st Dec 2011 to 02nd Feb 2012
    • CFA approval accorded and Tender Enquiry issued over a period of 45 days from  26th Dec 2011 to 14th Feb 2012, and
    • Supply orders prepared over a month period from 17th Apr 2012 to 22nd May 2012.
  • Point to be noted that
  • The requirement of chemicals was split into demands below Rs. 10.0 Lakh to avoid TPC and open tender which would have fetched better quality at discounted prices. Further it has bypassed the expert higher level SPC (Store Procurement Committee) dealing cases costing more than Rs 10 lakh.

Placement of these orders on limited tender to known local vendors clearly exhibit vested interest through manipulation  in prices, quality, pack size etc so as to fetch financial benefits hence indicates financial corruption/ corrupt practices of giving business/ benefits to own firms.chem table2

Table-3

  • For Sl. 09-17 total estimated cost  is Rs. 6272502.00
    • From Sl No.09-15 Demand worth total estimated cost   Rs. 51.00 lakh are raised on Limited Tender basis on 31st Oct 2011  and Sl No 16,17 on 24,25th Oct 2011
    • These Demand are cleared in one  SPC meeting  conducted on   16th Nov 2011
    • CFA approval accorded and Tender Enquiry issued over a period of 15 days from  8th Dec 2011 to 21st Dec 2011, and
    • Supply orders prepared over six months period from  14th Jan 2012 to 22nd Jun 2012 (i.e. there appears no urgency).
  • Point to be noted that
  • The requirement of chemicals was split into demands below Rs. 10.0 Lakh to avoid TPC and open tender which would have fetched better quality at discounted prices. Further it has bypassed the expert higher level SPC (Store Procurement Committee) dealing cases costing more than Rs. 10 lakh headed by an honest officer Chairman Dr. DK Setua. Addl. Director having expertise with chemical background who might have not permitted splitting of cases in this manner.
  • Placement of these orders on limited tender to known local vendors clearly exhibit vested interest through manipulation  in prices, quality, pack size etc so as to fetch financial benefits hence indicates financial corruption/ corrupt practices of giving business/ benefits to own firms.chem table3

Table-4

  • For Sl. 18-30 total estimated cost  is Rs. 9060532.00
    • From Sl No.09-15 Demand are raised on Limited Tender basis over a period of 10 days from12th Oct 2011  to  21st Oct 2011
    • Out of these Demand most are cleared in one SPC meeting conducted on   16th Nov 2011 and only four demands were cleared in SPC meetings held on 8th Dec 2011 (01),  06th Jan 2012 (02 ) and 02nd Feb 2012 (01).
    • CFA approval accorded and Tender Enquiry issued over a period of 45 days from  29th Nov 2011 to 14th Feb 2012, and
    • Supply orders prepared over two and half months periodfrom  18th May 2012 to 30th  July2012.
  • Point to be noted that
    • The requirement of chemicals was split into demands below Rs. 10.0 Lakh to avoid TPC and open tender which would have fetched better quality at discounted prices. Further it has bypassed the expert higher level SPC (Store Procurement Committee) dealing cases costing more than Rs 10 lakh headed by an honest officer Chairman Dr. DK Setua, Addl. Director having expertise with chemical background who might have not permitted splitting of cases in this manner.
    • Placement of these orders on limited tender to known local vendors clearly exhibit vested interest through manipulation  in prices, quality, pack size etc so as to fetch financial benefits hence indicates financial corruption/ corrupt practices of giving business/ benefits to own firms.chem table4

From the facts stated above, it is amply crystal clear that prima facie material regarding Abuse of Authority by arrogant and corrupt administrator Dr. A K Saxena, Director DMSRDE exists.

    • That he entered into criminal conspiracy with Mr. Darshan Lal, Joint Director, Chairman SPC and Head MMG with an intention to cheat DRDO and exchequer’s money.
    • In pursuance of the said criminal conspiracy,  Dr. A K Saxena, Director and Mr. A K Singh, Technical Staff Officer of Director DMSRDE are tampering with evidence / documents that shall be prejudice to fair trial, investigation, trial or any inquiry.

In view of the above mentioned facts and evidences it is earnestly requested that an order for through investigation of all procurement done by Dr A K Saxena after assuming charge as Director, DMSRDE, DRDO, Kanpur to stop further corruption and wastage of poor tax payers money.

 

Date: 07th January 2014

 

Prabhu Dandriyal                                                                                                                             
21-Sunderwal, Raipur, Dehradun -248008                                                                              
0135-2787750 – 91-9411114879                                                                 
prabhudoon@gmail.com,  www.corruptionindrdo.com

 

Annexure -1 – ION DATED 12.12.2012 ISSUED BY MR. AMIT SARAIYA, HEAD MMG chem ion

Complaint against Dr A K Saxena, Director, DMSRDE, DRDO, Kanpur -III

To                                                                                                
Central Vigilance Commissioner,
Central Vigilance Commission,
Satarkta Bhawan, A- Block,
GPO Complex, INA,
New Delhi-110023

SUBJECT

Complaint against Mr. Shielendra Kumar, Scientist ‘E’ & Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director, DMSRDE, Kanpur For Corruption by issuing illegal & unauthorized Supply Orders for Cutting of Grass/Sarkanda, Pruning, Trimming & Cutting of Tress, Unauthorized construction of Parking Shades and Structural Alteration in R&D House(Director’s Residence) at DMSRDE, Kanpur

Sir,

BRIEF FACTS OF THE COMPLAINT

  1. Defence Materials & Stores Research & Development Establishment (DMSRDE), Kanpur is an establishment under Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO), Min. of Defence, DRDO Bhawan, New Delhi.
  2. Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena was appointed as Director, DMSRDE on 01st January 2011. Right from his joining he is involved in various kinds of Administrative and Financial irregularities that lead to Corruption.
  3. Mr. Shielendra Kumar, Scientist ‘E’ is heading three divisions in DMSRDE, Kanpur. These divisions are Material Management Group (MMG), Estate & Works Division and Paints & Coating Technology Division. He is  henchman of Dr. AK Saxena thereby he was appointed as Head of three major Corruption full divisions despite several senior officers to Shielendra Kumar has not been appointed as Head of any division in DMSRDE, Kanpur.
  4. Mr. Shielendra Kumar, Scientist ‘E’ made gross violation of DRDO Purchase Rules in issue of several illegal & unauthorized supply orders costing more than Rs. Twenty lakhs for cutting of grass/wild bushes/sarkanda, cutting/pruning & trimming of trees and unauthorized construction of Parking Shades in DMSRDE, Kanpur. He is also involved in unauthorized structural alteration in dedicated Government accommodation.
  5. DMSRDE, Kanpur is having 45 acres of defence land in which its Technical Area of DMSRDE has been constructed and lot of space near buildings, boundary walls etc is open and having more than 600 trees of various kind of wood including seesam, ukliptus, neem, sagaun etc.
  6. Supply Orders for cutting of grass/wild bushes/Sarkanda worth Rs.  3,86,998.00  By Shielendra Kumar, Scientist ‘E’ on orders of Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena

a.   No. 11026/1/D(Lands)/2000 Government of India, Ministry of Defence New Delhi, dated 31st August 2000, clearly lays guidelines for cutting of grass / Sarkanda in Defence lands. It says that commanding Officers (OC) / Head of the Establishments are authorized to remove/ cut/ dispose of grass/ sarkanda subject to the following conditions:-

    i.            The grass will always be cut in time to avoid any fire hazard etc.

    ii.            The OC will be personally accountable to ensure the cutting of grass in time/ safety of the Ammunition/ ordnance Depots.

  iii.            A Board of Officers will be convened by the concerned Station HQrs of the Ammunition Depot/Ordnance Depot for disposal of the grass/ sarkanda and a representative of the DEO concerned will also be included in the Board.

  iv.            The disposal of the grass cutting rights shall be by calling tenders and highest bidder will be allotted the contract.

 v.            At the onset of the grass cutting season, the Board of Officers will inspect the land and prepare the Minimum Reserve Price (MRP) of the grass to be cut/ removed.

  vi.            The MRP would be approved by the OC/ Head of the Establishment concerned in consultation with the DEO. However, in case of a difference of opinion, the final decision rests with the OC/Head of the Establishment.

  vii.            In case of receipt of bids lower than the MRP, the authority competent to accept the same would be the GOC-in-C of the Command in consultation with the Principal ·Director, DE, in respect of cases where the MRP exceeds Rs. 10,000/-. In the case of MRP of Rs. 10,000/- and below, the OC in consultation with the DEO would be competent to accept bids lower than MRP.

 viii.            The proceeds will be credited to the Central Treasury by the OC Ammunition Depot/ Ordnance Depot.

b.     Copy of Letter No. 11026/1/D(Lands)/2000 Government of India, Ministry of Defence New Delhi, dated 31st August 2000 is enclosed as Annexure-1. The same rule is quoted here for ready reference.

c.     The same rule applies to DRDO and is applied in letter spirit except for DMSRDE since 1st January 2011 when Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, a corrupt officer having scant respect of laid down rules and regulation took the charge as Director DMSRDE.  There is no provision of cutting grass/Sarkanda under DRDO’s Purchase Management 2006.  Gross irregularities, violation and criminal misconduct have been committed by Mr. Shielendra Kumar, Scientist ‘E’ and Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena in cutting of grass / sarkanda in DMSRDE. The major irregularities and violations of rules are given below.

               i.            The head of Establishment shall ensure that a Board of Officers is convened by the concerned Station HQrs for disposal of the grass/ sarkanda and a representative of the DEO concerned will also be included in the Board. No such Board of Officers with a representative of DEO has been ordered by Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director DMSRDE.

             ii.            The disposal of the grass cutting rights shall be by calling tenders and highest bidder will be allotted the contract. No such exercise was done and instead Mr. Shielendra Kumar and Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena entered into a criminal conspiracy by inviting tenders for execution of this illegal work at the cost of exchequers money. Under normal circumstances the highest bidder would have been allotted the work and his money deposited in Central Treasury. The travesty of the matter is that instead of department gaining money has lost the same.

           iii.            The rules clearly say that at the onset of the grass cutting season, the Board of Officers will inspect the land and prepare the Minimum Reserve Price (MRP) of the grass to be cut/ removed.  Both in the calendar year 2012 and 2013 Mr. Shielendra Kumar and Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena have split the demand.

d.     Details of illegal Supply Orders and execution of unauthorized work regarding Cutting/Cleaning of dense grass and Sarkanda by Mr. Shielendra Kumar and Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena under a criminal conspiracy is as mentioned below: cvc sarkanda table1

e.    Copies of supply orders for demands no. DMSRDE/13WKS007 dated 17 May 2012, DMSRDE/13WKS014 dated 08 June 2012, DMSRDE/13WKS038 dated 05 Nov 2012 and DMSRDE/14WKS021 23 Sep 2013 are enclosed as Annexure-2 , Annexure-3, Annexure-4 & Annexure-5.

f.     M/s Vikalp Enterprises, Kanpur is under contract with Director, DMSRDE for Environmental Control Hygiene and Maintenance Services at DMSRDE, Technical Area since past ten years and this agreement renewed in each contract year with mutually agreed terms & conditions. In annexure-1 of this contract between Director, DMSRDE, Kanpur and M/s Vikalp Enterprises, Kanpur for the year 2012 it is clearly mentioned that “Cleaning/trimming of trees/bushes on the sides of roads up to one meter and Removal/clearance of grass/bushes around test beds, buildings, sheds, petrol bunk and transformers” is included in scope of work.

g.      In the year 2010, 2011 and 2012 supply orders were issued to M/s Vikalp Enterprises, Kanpur for Environmental Control Hygiene and Maintenance Services at DMSRDE. The average cost of Supply Order is Rs.9, 90,000. Thereby the job of cutting of grass/sarkanda/bushes/trimming of tree were executed by M/s Vikalp Enterprises in DMRDE and fake cases were indented and supply orders were issued to M/s J.S. Enterprises by Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director, DMSRDE.

h.      The contracts awarded under supply orders as stated in point (d) were issued to M/s JS Enterprises which is fake firm of Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena and whole amount of money went to Dr. Saxena as no such work was carried out by M/s JS Enterprises as the said work was already covered under scope of work of the contract awarded to M/s Vikalp Enterprises, Kanpur for Environmental Control Hygiene and Maintenance Services at DMSRDE, Technical Area. Thereby this is clear case of fraud & Corruption of public money of Rs. 4, 81,498.00 by Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena and Shielendra Kumar.

i.      It is  explicitly clear that illegal, gross irregularities, subversion and violation of  rules and criminal misconduct has been committed by Mr. Shilendra Kumar, Scientist ‘E’ and Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena in cutting of grass / sarkanda in DMSRDE. Instead of the Government gaining Rs. 2.50 lakhs of money from the bidder these two corrupt officers have made exchequer to lose an amount of Rs.  8.0 lakhs of money.

7.     Supply Order for Pruning and Trimming of Tree in Tech. area and residentialcvc sarkanda table2

8.      Copy of the demand no. DMSRDE/13WKS035 dated 03 Oct 2012 is enclosed as Annexure-6. The vendors mentioned in demand are fake and not concerned with activities of cutting, trimming and pruning of trees. Director, DMSRDE is not authorized to issue any Supply Order for cutting/trimming/pruning of trees in defence land and only authorized agency for this purpose in Ministry of Defence is Principle Controller/DEO, Defence Estate Office, Lucknow. Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena issued Supply Order without any authority to private vendor by heavy loss of revenue to exchequer and permitted to take along the wood costing more than ten lakhs free of cost to vendor along with cost of Supply Order. Copy of the supply order no. 13AM0036 dated 26 Feb 2013 is enclosed as Annexure-7.

9.      Supply Order to private vendor for construction of Parking Shade in DMSRDE, Kanpur

      i.            An application under RTI Act 2005 dated 04 October 2013 was submitted to CPIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur for seeking information about Parking. CPIO, DMSRDE vide their letter dated 29 October 2013 replied that “Director, DMSRDE, Kanpur has not ordered for construction of any vehicle parking stand inside DMSRDE not being constructed”. Copy of the CPIO letter dated 29 October 2013 is enclosed Annexure-8.

    ii.            First Appellate Authority, DRDO vide their letter dated 10 December 2013 informed that “M/s Gupta Construction is not a registered vendor in DMSRDE”. Copy of the FAA letter dated 10 Dec 2013 is enclosed as Annexure-9.

  iii.            Director, DMSRDE ordered Estate & Works Division to initiate the case of Vehicle Parking Shed. This case was initiated in two times with different nomenclature. Details are given below.cvc sarkanda table3

     vi.            Total cost expenditure in construction of Parking Shade was Rs. 12,70,000(Rupees Twelve Lakh seventy thousand only). Copy of Supply Order No. 13AT0230 dated 14 Jan 2013 is enclosed as Annexure-10.

    vii.            Director is not authorized to execute any civil works under build up. The only authorized agency to carried out said civil construction works under DRDO is MES. First items have been purchased on 14 Jan 2013 and the construction has been executed on 8 May 2013. As M/s Gupta Construction is not registered vendor of DMSRDE so Supply Order should not be executed to M/s Gupta Construction under Purchase Management 2006 of DRDO.

10.      Massive Structural Alterations/Additions in R&D House DMSRDE, Kanpur by Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director, DMSRDE, Kanpur and Mr. Shielendra Kumar were executed during 01 March 2011-30 Sept 2013 in which unauthorized construction has been done by misuse of power, diversion of MES fund and misappropriation of funds. Approximate amount of Rs. Thirty lakhs were expenditure in illegal & unauthorized construction in Government accommodation at DMSRDE by Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena.   

11.    In aforesaid above mentioned cases Corruption has been meted out by Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director, DMSRDE, Kanpur and Mr. Shielendra Kumar, Scientist ‘E’, Head, Material Management Group and  Head, Estate & Works Division by misuse of powers for personal gain for which they were not authorized to do  under DRDO Purchase Management 2006.

Therefore, in light of the above mentioned facts and evidences, I it is requested you to issue order for inquiry and disciplinary action against Mr. Shielendra Kumar, Scientist ‘E’ and Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director, DMSRDE by CVO, Ministry of Defence.

Prabhu Dandriyal                                                  28th  December 2013                                                                                 
21-Sunderwal, Raipur, Dehradun -248008                                                                              
0135-2787750 – 91-9411114879 Email-prabhudoon@gmail.com,  www.corruptionindrdo.com

ANNEXURE-10

INDEX cvc sarkanda table4

To,                                                                                                                 
Joint Secretary (Estt.) and Public Grievances & CVO,
Ministry of Defence, Government of India, 97, South Block,
New Delhi -110 105
 
To
Sh Avinash Chander
SA to RM,DG,DRDO
Room No 541, DRDO Bhawan
Rajaji Marg, New Delhi – 110105
 
To                                                                                                                              
The Defence Minister
Room No -104, South Block
New Delhi – 110011 

Complaint against Dr A K Saxena, Director, DMSRDE, DRDO, Kanpur -II

To                                                                                                                    26th December 2013
Central Vigilance Commissioner
Central Vigilance Commission
Satarkta Bhawan, A- Block, GPO Complex, INA
New Delhi-110023
 
To,                                                                                                                 
Joint Secretary (Estt.) and Public Grievances & CVO,
Ministry of Defence, Government of India, 97, South Block,
New Delhi -110 105
 
To
Sh Avinash Chander
SA to RM,DG,DRDO
Room No 541, DRDO Bhawan
Rajaji Marg, New Delhi – 110105
 
To                                                                                                                              
The Defence Minister
Room No -104, South Block
New Delhi – 110011

SUBJECT : Complaint against Dr A K Saxena, Director, DMSRDE, DRDO, Kanpur

DRDO has an approved policy for guiding various procurements (Purchase Management –2006 document issued vide Govt. letter No DMM/PP/0000205/M/868/D(R&D) dated 22nd March 2006 amended vide letter No DMM/PP/0000206/M/2386/D(R&D) dated 21st Aug 2006

CORRIGENDUM No: 2 DMM/II/PP/0000207/M/3041/D(R&D) dated 15th Oct 2007

CORRIGENDUM No: 3 DMM/II/PP/0000208/M/3201/D(R&D) dated 16th Sept 2008

CORRIGENDUM No: 4 DMM/II/PP/0000210/P1/92/D(R&D) dated 14th Jan 2011

DRDO Directors never read above procurement documents because each and every case where Director’s pet agent involved means the above purchase rules have no meanings.

  1. Shri Rakesh Kumar Gupta, Scientist ‘C’ Applied Chemistry Division raised a demand No. DMSRDE/13552009 for “Laboratory Microprocessor Based Programmable High Temp.Furnace” on 30th August 2012.
  2. SPC date 13th September 2012
  3. DRDO Hqrs approval 1st October 2012
  4. Tender Date 1st October 2012 (see the efficiency)
  5. TEC on 6th December 2012
  6. TPC on 16th Jan 2013
  7. Supply order place to M/s Omega Furnace Industries Bangalore, “Omega Atmosphere Controlled Muffle Furance ” vide SO No  DMSRDE/13AT0240/552/12-13/CMS-II dated 26 Feb 2011
  8. Supply Order of Rs 16,81,500.00
  9. Stores Received on 27th September 2013 vide RIN No 14LP0149
  10. Now on the Director’s pet agent M/s Manglam Traders come in front and a review TPC was done,  under Chairmanship of  Dr. Sarfaraz Alam, Sc’G’               para two of review TPC                                                                                                     “Now, the firm M/s  Omega Furnace Industries, Bangalore has intimated that billing and supply of stores will be done by their local dealer M/s Manglam Traders, Kanpur, vide letter of even no dated September 24, 2013”                                           Para three of review TPC                                                                                                  “The finance rep told that the stores have been supplied by M/s Manglam Traders, Kanpur. Hence, the payment may be made to M/s Manglam Traders, Kanpur”      Para four of review TPC                                                                                                       “ In view of aforesaid TPC recommends the following
    For-Supply the stores & payment may be made to M/s  Omega Furnace Industries, Bangalore Read-Supply the stores & payment may be made to M/s Manglam Traders, Kanpur
  11. In view of above details, it is clear Violation of Purchase Management 2006 Rule 7.15(a) Constitution of TPC/NC,  it is requested that registered the complaint against Dr A K Saxena, Director, DMSRDE and his blind followers who are mishandling the government funds for their own vested interest. A thorough investigation is needed to explore the relation between Dr A K Saxena, Director, DMSRDE and M/s Manglam Traders, Kanpur. It may be reveal crores of crores rupees scam in DMSRDE and RCI, DRDO.
 
Prabhu Dandriyal                                                                                                                            
21-Sunderwal, Raipur, Dehradun -248008                                                                              
0135-2787750 – 91-9411114879                                                                 
prabhudoon@gmail.com,  www.corruptionindrdo.com

Complaint against Dr A K Saxena, Director, DMSRDE, DRDO, Kanpur

To                                                                                         24th December 2013
Central Vigilance Commissioner
Central Vigilance Commission
Satarkta Bhawan, A- Block, GPO Complex, INA
New Delhi-110023
 
To,                                                                                                                  
Joint Secretary (Estt.) and Public Grievances & CVO,
Ministry of Defence, Government of India, 97, South Block,
New Delhi -110 105
 
To
Sh Avinash Chander
SA to RM,DG,DRDO
Room No 541, DRDO Bhawan
Rajaji Marg, New Delhi – 110105
 
To                                                                                                                               
The Defence Minister
Room No -104, South Block
New Delhi – 110011 

SUBJECT : Complaint against Dr A K Saxena, Director, DMSRDE, DRDO, Kanpur

DRDO has an approved policy for guiding various procurements (Purchase Management –2006 document issued vide Govt. letter No DMM/PP/0000205/M/868/D(R&D) dated 22nd March 2006 amended vide letter No DMM/PP/0000206/M/2386/D(R&D) dated 21st Aug 2006

CORRIGENDUM No: 2 DMM/II/PP/0000207/M/3041/D(R&D) dated 15th Oct 2007

CORRIGENDUM No: 3 DMM/II/PP/0000208/M/3201/D(R&D) dated 16th Sept 2008

CORRIGENDUM No: 4 DMM/II/PP/0000210/P1/92/D(R&D) dated 14th Jan 2011

However, every Director of DRDO Labs has fixed their own agent (supplier) who can supply from needle to missile components or any high tech components/systems. In fact to this agent is always behind each and every supply national or international. This agent searches the world market and identifies a manufacturer / suppliers and obtains the details & specification and passed to Director for further procurement.

The following case is the example of modus oprendi of procurement case which directly benefit the lab director.

  1. DMSRDE wanted to procure 50 Lit. High Temperature Reaction System.
  2. Dr A K Saxena, Director, DMSRDE, DRDO , Kanpur discussed this requirement with his pet supplier M/s Manglam Traders, Kanpur
  3. Mr Anish Gupta from M/s Manglam Traders sends a mail to Dr A K Saxena on 6th December 2011

Subject: “Offer for High Temp. Reaction Unit”

“The line diagram attached is not exactly as per their offer, they have forwarded us understand it will be somehow like the same. As per our line of requirement they will send us in 2 to 3 days.” Attached two file with this mail

(i)     DMSRDE_Techno-Commercial_Reaction-unit-50lit (enclosed)

(ii)   IPID0022 (enclosed)

4.      Dr A K Saxena forwarded this mail to Sh J N Srivastava  , Scientist ‘F’  indenter on  22 Dec 2011.
 
5.        The DMSRDE_Techno-Commercial_Reaction-unit-50 lit proposal was originally send by the manufacturer “De Dietrich Process Systems India Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai” REF: DDI/DMSRDE/534.  DATE: 30th Nov 2011. In thirteen page proposal with specification and terms of condition and in page ten of price quoted Rs 62,50,000/- .

6.    In DRDO procurement policy lab Directors have power to sign up to 50 lakhs only.
Since the cost was escalating the limit, so Dr A K Saxena asked M/s Manglam to split the quote.
7.     As desired by Dr A K Saxena, Mr Anish, partner of M/s Manglam again send a mail on 27th Feb 2012

Subject : “LAB REACTOR”

“As per your discussion held with Mr. Manish enclosed please find here polycarbosilane reactor splitted in two quotes along with their technical prposal and specs for Tender Enquriy”. Attached five files with this mail

(i)                 Specification for High Temp. Reaction Overhead System (enclosed)

(ii)               DMSRDE_Techno-Commercial_50lit_High_Temp_Reactor-Price_Bid (enclosed)

(iii)             DMSRDE_Techno-Commercial_Reaction_Overhead_assembly-Technical_Bid (enclosed)

(iv)              DMSRDE_Techno-Commercial_Reaction-unit-50lit (enclosed)

(v)                Specification for 50 liter High Temp. MONEL Reactor (enclosed)

9.    The case split in two i. –High Temp. Reaction Overhead Systemprice quoted Rs 28,50,000/-

ii.- 50 Ltrs. High Temp. Monel Reactor – price quoted Rs 38,50,000/-

10.   Dr A K Saxena forwarded this mail to Sh J N Srivastava, Scientist ‘F’ intender on 2 March 2012.
11.   Amazing, a supplier dictates the specifications and quotations details of tender enquiry this is the harsh reality and modus oprendi of DRDO procurement scenario.
12.    As dictated by supplier/agent the demands raised by

(i)                 File no DMSRDE/13PPD003 dated 19-Apr-2012
 With new nomenclature – High Temp. Reaction Overhead System,
SPC date 3rd May 2012,
CFA (Dr A K Saxena) Approved 23rd  May 2012,
DRDO HQ APPROVAL 23-May-2012 & Recommended ,
Tender no 13ATT022 date 05-Jun-2012,
TEC-21st August 2012,
TPC – 30th August 2012,
Supply Order No 13AT0165 – 13th September 2012 to M/s De Dietrich Process System, Mumbai,
Supply Order Cost- Rs 30,93,750.00,
Supply Received on 28th Jan 2013 vide RIN No. 13UP0271
 
(ii)               File no DMSRDE/13PPD004 dated 19-Apr-2012
With new nomenclature – 50 Ltrs. High Temp. Monel Reactor,
SPC date 3rd May 2012,
CFA(Dr A K Saxena) Approved 23rd  May 2012,
DRDO HQ APPROVAL 23-May-2012 & Recommended,
Tender no 13ATT022 date 05-Jun-2012,
TEC-21st August 2012,
TPC – 24th August 2012,
Supply Order No 13AT0168 – 20th September 2012 to M/s De Dietrich Process System, Mumbai,
Supply Order Cost- Rs 43,31,250.00,
Supply Received on 28th Jan 2013 vide RIN No. 13UP0270
 

13      Reactor was deliberately split into two parts in budget forecast and two separate FBE numbers allotted to bring the purchase within Director’s power by Dr A K Saxena.
 
14.     Two Technical Evaluation Committees one headed by Dr. D N Tiphati and the other by Mr. Darshan Lal clear the split cases and Dr. Sarfaz Alam Chairman of Store Purchase Committee clears these split cases on the same day.   
 
15.     Mr J N Srivastava, Scientist ‘F’ indenter protests by saying that “The splitting of one item into two is against the purchase procedure of DRDO and CVC’s guidelines“. Dr A K Saxena forced him to process case in split way because of DRDO Directors having absolute power and absolute power means absolute corruption..
 
16.      However on 12th October 2013, Dr A K Saxena sends a memo DP/15 to Mr J N Srivastava strangely enquiring as to why this case of reactor was split and not purchased as a single unit. Dr A K Saxena is not satisfied with the reply of Mr J N Srivastava that he was instructed by Dr. Ashok Rajan the programme Director to indent and instead pressurizing Mr J N Srivastava to justify the unjustable.
 
17.       Till date the reactor was not assembled  and poor tax payer money was wasted, although the payment was not cleared but manpower cost of project was wasted in the interest of Dr A K Saxena.
 
18.      Poly-di-methyle-saline (PDMS) cannot be processed and converted into Polycarbosailine as a product without assembling both the parts of reactor.
 
19.      Poly-di-methyle-saline (PDMS) already purchased worth lakhs of rupees from Dr A K saxena’s pet supplier (Mr Anish Gupta) The PDMS case will send separately.
 
20.       Dr A K Saxena violated all the laid down DRDO procurement rules mentioned above.
 
21.       It is requested that the case may thoroughly examined keeping mind to cost to benefit ratio and the role of DRDO Hqrs rep and PCDA (R&D) involvement. Fix the accountabilities and booked the culprits at the earliest.

Prabhu Dandriyal                                                                                                                             
21-Sunderwal, Raipur, Dehradun -248008                                                                               
0135-2787750 – 91-9411114879                                                                  
prabhudoon@gmail.com,  www.corruptionindrdo.com

Annexure – 7

  1. DMSRDE_Techno-Commercial_Reaction-unit-50lit
  2. IPID0022
  3. Specification for High Temp. Reaction Overhead System
  4. DMSRDE_Techno-Commercial_50lit_High_Temp_Reactor-Price_Bid
  5. DMSRDE_Techno-Commercial_Reaction_Overhead_assembly-Technical_Bid
  6. DMSRDE_Techno-Commercial_Reaction-unit-50lit
  7. Specification for 50 liter High Temp. MONEL Reactor

CORRUPTION IN PROCUREMENT OF ANTIVIRUS – DMSRDE

 
To                                                                                                            17th December 2013
Central Vigilance Commissioner
Central Vigilance Commission
Satarkta Bhawan, A- Block, GPO Complex, INA
New Delhi-110023

SUBJECT : CORRUPTION IN PROCUREMENT OF ANTIVIRUS

COMPLAINT AGAINST :  Mr. SARVESH KUMAR, SCIENTIST ‘F’ and  Dr. ARVIND KUMAR SAXENA, DIRECTOR, DMSRDE, KANPUR

Sir,

BRIEF FACTS OF THE COMPLAINT 

  1. Defence Materials & Stores Research & Development Establishment (DMSRDE), Kanpur is an establishment under Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO), Min. of Defence, DRDO Bhawan, New Delhi.
  2. Purchase Management 2006 is applicable for procurement of store items in DRDO.  Gross irregularities and violation of Purchase Management 2006 was made in procurement of Antivirus Software in year 2013 when the cases were indented by Mr. Sarvesh Kumar, Scientist ‘F’. The major irregularities and violations of purchase rules are given below.

i.        Method/Mode of Procurement: Method of procurement in all the three cases of Quick Heal Antivirus was Local Board. When there was a consolidated demand of 372 Antivirus and total cost of the case was around Rs. 270000.00 then case should be raised under Limited Tender as per Rule 7.6 of PM 2006. Vide letter No. DMM/II/PP/0000207/M/3041/D(R&D) dated 15th Oct 2007 Corrigendum No. -2 Directors of Establishments are empowered to constitute Local Purchase Committee for purchase up to cost of Rs. 1.0 Lakh on urgent requirements by amending Rule 6(d) of PM 2006. Copy of the letter is enclosed as Annexure-7. The same rule is quoted here for ready reference.

Purchase of goods by purchase committee: Purchase of goods costing above Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) only and up to Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh) only on each occasion may be made on the recommendations of a duly constituted Local Purchase Committee consisting of three members of an appropriate level as decided by the Director of Lab/Estt. The committee will survey the market to ascertain the reasonableness of rate, quality and specifications and

Identify the appropriate supplier. Before recommending placement of the purchase order, the members of the committee will jointly record a certificate as under. CFA will ensure that splitting of demands is avoided.

ii.        Splitting of consolidated demand of Antivirus in three parts: Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena split the consolidated the demand in three parts and misused his official position & powers so that case could not go under Limited Tender. In all cases of three local boards supply order was placed to the same vendor. This establishes vested interests of Dr. Saxena and Mr. Sarvesh Kumar using Local Board for purchase of Antivirus instead of Limited Tender. This leads loss to public fund and Corruption of Rs. 37920.00 by Mr. Sarvesh Kumar.

iii.        As per provisions of Purchase Management 2006 Rule 5.1.1(b)Purchase orders will not be split-up to avoid the necessity for obtaining sanction of the higher authorities. Copy of the rule is enclosed as Annexure-8. Sprit of Purchase Rules and CVC Guidelines is that “The proposals shall not be split merely to bring them within the delegated powers”.

iv.           Local Board did not make market survey to ascertain the reasonableness of rate, quality and specifications and identify the appropriate supplier, rather one vendor M/s P. S. Computronics pre-fixed by Dr. Saxena was allowed to submit three quotations to Sarvesh Kumar and board members were forced to sign the certificates and other purchase related papers. Hence purchase procedure according to Purchase Management 2006 was not followed and grossly violated in this case.

3.           Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director, DMSRDE, Kanpur and Mr. Sarvesh Kumar, Scientist ‘F’ are posted in DMSRDE, Kanpur. Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena is Director, DMSRDE with effect from 01 January 2011.

4.           Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director, DMSRDE dissolved Information Technology Division on 02 Dec 2013 and constituted a new division “Computer Science Division” under headship of Mr. Sarvesh Kumar, Scientist ‘F’.

5.            Procurement and installation of Antivirus in all computers available in DMSRDE was one of the charters of Information Technology Division. Every year this division was purchasing about 300 units of Antivirus Licenses for security of PCs. These Antiviruses are having life time of one year from date of installation.

6.            In the year 2011, a demand was initiated for procurement of Antivirus Licenses with following details. Copy of the demand is enclosed as Annexure-1.table1

7.             300 units of Quick Heal Total Security Antivirus were purchased in the year 2012 on the basis of demand mentioned above. Details of procurement are given below. Copies of Supply Orders issued on 14 Nov 2011 are enclosed as Annexure-2.

table2

8.           Unit price details of Quick Heal Antivirus purchased in year 2012 are given below.table3

9.            During the period his posting at Information Technology Division, DMSRDE, Kanpur from 01.01. 2011 to 02.12.2013, Mr. Sarvesh Kumar, Scientist ‘F’ made following procurements as indenter on orders of Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director. Copies of the demands initiated by Sarvesh Kumar are enclosed as Annexure-3LIST OF CASES INDENTED AND ITEMS PROCURDED BY MR. SARVESH KUMAR, SCIENTIST ‘F’

table4 Demand status of cases initiated by  Mr. Sarvesh Kumar is enclosed as Annexure-4.

10.            In Information Technology Division, DMSRDE, Kanpur three Scientist Mr. R.P. Bhat, Scientist ‘F’, Mr. Sarvesh Kumar, Scientist ‘F’ and Mr. N.P. Gupta, Scientist ‘C’ were posted from 19 Feb 2012- 02 Dec 2013. Mr. R.P. Bhat, Scientist ‘F’ was Head of Information Technology Division.

11.              IT Division sought Proposal for Antivirus for procurement of Quickheal Total Security Antivirus from M/s Well Known Computers Pvt Ltd, Kanpur in the year 2013 on 14.01.2013. Copy of the proposal dated 14.01.2013 is enclosed as Annexure-5. The details of the proposal Well Known Computers are as under.

table5

12.            In the year 2013, for procurement of Quick Heal Total Security Antivirus (300 Units) a Statement of Case was put-up to Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director, DMSRDE for procurement of Antivirus under Limited Tender through Head IT Division but Dr. Saxena turned down the case and constituted a Local Board for procurement of Antivirus.  This Local Board was constituted of Mr. Sarvesh Kumar, Scientist ‘E’ (now Scientist ‘F’) Chairman, Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Scientist ‘D’ and Mr. N.P. Gupta, Scientist ‘C’.

13.             On direction of Dr. Saxena, Mr. Sarvesh Kumar split the demand of Antivirus licenses in three parts and gets financial sanction from Dr. Saxena, Director in three cases under Local Board. Total consolidated demands of 372 Antivirus licenses were split in three parts so that cases remain under financial powers (Rs. 1.0 lakh) of the Director and procurement could be made under Local Board. Details of procurement of Quick Heal Total Security Antiviruses in the year 2013 by Mr. Sarvesh Kumar, Scientist ‘F’ are given below.table6

These Quickheal Antivirus packs were received by Mr. Sarvesh Kumar on 11 Apr 2013 vide Receipt & Inspection Note (RIN) No. 14LP0009 and 14LP0010 dated 11 April 2013. Copies of the receipts are enclosed as Annexure-6.

14.        Unit price details of Quick Heal Antivirus purchased in year 2013 by Mr. Sarvesh Kumar are given below.table7

15.         It is very clear from the observation of the Purchase Proposal of Well Known Computers and procurements made by Mr. Sarvesh Kumar that the rates of Quickheal Antivirus are higher in later case. This lead loss to Government fund due to corrupt practices adopted by Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena and Mr. Sarvesh Kumar. Comparative details of both cases are given below.

Comparative rates of Well Known Computers (Proposal) and P.S. Computronics (Sarvesh)table8

Loss to public fund on purchase of Antivirus by Sarvesh Kumar on split of consolidated demand by Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director, DMSRDEtable9

16.      Before placing the order the IT division can see these online offers which are less then quoted price and negotiate for best price from vendors in the interest of organization. Even that the for bulk there paper license offers are available.
17.       Therefore purchases made by Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena and Mr. Sarvesh Kumar by split of consolidated demand of Antivirus lead loss to public fund by Rs. 37920.00 and in turn make a scope of Corruption.

VIOLATION OF DIRECTOR’S POWER AND CONDUCT RULES

i.     Misuse of power & position for personal gain
ii.    Violation of Rule 3(1) and 3(2)(i) and 3(1)(iii) of CCS(Conducts) Rules 1964                   iii.    Splitting of demands of Antivirus in three parts and Constitution of Local Board instead of Limited Tender for purchase of Antivirus                                                                   iv.   Sanctioning of three cases of purchases each just below Rs. 1.0 Lakh of his financial powers

AS HEAD “Computer Science Division” MR. SARVESH KUMAR, SCIENTIST ‘F’ VIOLATED THE DRDO PROCUREMENT RULES

i.       Did not follow the purchase procedure of Local Purchase Committee. Didnot make any market survey instead collected three quotations by hand from representative of M/s P. S. Computronics, Kanpur and forced to sign on the papers to other two members of the board.
ii.       Gross violation of conduct under Rule 3.(1) of CCS(Conducts) Rules 1964

Therefore, in light of the above mentioned facts and evidences, may kindly investigate the matter. This may be the “tip of iceberg”. Further investigation may reveal violations of procurement for personal gain in the tune of corers of rupees.

The classic example from DMSRDE, Kanpur is the violation of procurement rules for the purchase of   “High Temp. Reaction Overhead System” 28,50,000 &   “50 Ltrs. High Temp. Monel Reactor” 38,50,000. This split case example of where Director’s power is limited up to 50 lakh with a Hqrs rep. because without splited the system cost was Rs 62.5 lakh. The details will be followed.

Similar misadventure was committed several times in the name of technology development by Ex, DG, DRDO Dr V K Saraswat, where financial power was limited up to 50 corers  and CAG in its special audit noticed violation of splitting the procurement cases while CCPA approved for Rs 150 corers.

Regards

 Prabhu Dandriyal
21-Sunderwal, Raipur, Dehradun -248008
0135-2787750 – 91-9411114879 
prabhudoon@gmail.comwww.corruptionindrdo.com
table10
 

DRDO scientist suspended hours before his retirement

Express news service : New Delhi, Sat Dec 01 2012, 04:02 hrs
The DRDO Friday suspended a senior scientist, Dr Arun Kumar, just three hours prior to his superannuation for alleged irregularities in recruitment.

The Central Vigilance Commission had passed strictures against Kumar in August as well as asked the Defence Ministry to reconsider his daughter’s appointment as scientist ‘C’ by the DRDO. Another senior official, Dr Neelam Bhalla, had accused Kumar of favouritism.

However, an internal panel had given Kumar a clean chit in June 2012, stating that “no favour or undue advantage was given to his daughter”.

The DRDO spokesperson refused to comment but Dr W Selvamurthy, Chief Controller R&D for Life Sciences confirmed Kumar’s suspension.

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.