Tag Archives: defence

Secret audit reveals DRDO irregularities

Secret audit reveals DRDO irregularities

TNN Aug 14, 2012, 03.14AM IST

NEW DELHI: A confidential internal audit ordered by the defence ministry has found several financial and other irregularities in the functioning of the Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO), which has a network of 50 labs and an annual budget of over Rs 10,500 crore.

 

This comes a day after TOI reported that none of the main recommendations — first by the Rama Rao Committee in 2008 and then a watered-down version by a committee headed by the defence secretary in 2010 — has been implemented to revamp DRDO to ensure that advanced weapon systems are developed for the armed forces without huge time and cost overruns.

The fresh internal audit, conducted by the finance wing of the defence ministry, has raised serious questions about the lack of transparency in DRDO’s functioning, including the alleged sanctioning of Rs 2.80 crore by DRDO chief V K Saraswat to a mathematical society headed by him.

 

DRDO spokesman Ravi Gupta, on being contacted, said the issues raised in the report were “essentially in the nature of preliminary observations” and the audit itself was “vitiated by a faulty process”. “None of the points raised in the audit report stands scrutiny… We are giving a point-wise rebuttal to the baseless conclusions,” he said.

 

The audit report also pointed out that DRDO was splitting sanctions for its projects to avoid seeking approvals from “competent financial authorities”.

Readers comments

Polachan Vm (Egypt)

8 days ago

….if all the black money and the corrupt money is confiscated, we can buy USA three times. ..luckily our leaders and judges are thieves..wishing all poor Indians a very happy Independance day…  9249850342 ..former thief justice..

myalmightygod (India)

9 days ago

God bless india.

Raghubir Singh (Pune)

9 days ago

Internal audit is one of the healthy procedures to have financial checks and balances in place and every government department has such auditing as a matter of routine even in ops units in forward areas. There is nothing secret about it. As a first step there are preliminary observations-majority of which get settled after the explanations are given at working level showing relevant file/documents/authority etc. We can delve on two point’s including MBT Arjun being overweight which has also found mention in the preliminary observation. Best MBT’s of the world like US’s Abram, UK’s Challenger, Germany’s Leopard & Isarel’s Merkava having crew of four all weigh in the region of 62-65 tons as compared to 58 tons that of Arjun with four crew which is great feat in weight management! MBT Arjun has withstood enough flak for decades & proven its merit in the desert trials pitted against blue eyed T-90. But eventually DRDO would have to develop newer third generation tank as China has done. Splitting the sanctions is generally to win race against time for projects which otherwise would get stuck up in red tapes -for which there should be red carpets to roll on smoothly? Splitting by remaining within limit is permissible and let us not grudge this financial authority bestowed on authorities like Directors.

spot on (Paris) 9 days ago

DRDO Chief V K Saraswat was first one to vouch for the Tetra Trucks performance and suitability when former Army gen VK Singh blew the scam in the open. Once scam thickened and stink ed too much, this guy faded in the air. CBI and media doing good work for the khangress family. My friend worked for many year for DRDO and he told me that most of the project engineers outsource work to companies formed by their own family members. Please probe middle management too to show the rot.

dasg (NY) replies to spot on 8 days ago

No wonder the morons continue to buy 70% of the weapons, unmatched by any nation with even 50 million let alone 1200 million. VK Singh remarks must have sent shiver down this crook Saraswat’s spine. But nothing will happen, whole edifice is rotten, and as a result honest people like VK Singh are cast as vilians and crooks like Saraswat are applauded.

dasg (NY) 9 days ago

Ha ha ha Mathematical Society! Good one. Corruption thy name is Indian. But then he is thinking if Sonia, Kamadi, Kanimozi, Raja, Laloo, Pawar and almost everyone why not me. ISRO Nair too made enough. The whole edifice has become rotten to the core.

Mohan (London) replies to dasg 8 days ago

I will like to share my personal experience about DRDO. I have an international reputed Masters in science from one of top European university.I studied from top 10 Indian engineering college. I am working abroad in a research lab, applied for a job @DRDO; they didn’t even select me. While most of the scientists who work in DRDO are below average, lack any capability to produce anything substantial, they wont choose NRI candidates as they believe in corruption. Dumb engineers and scientists want to maintain their status quo without delivering any result!!

bg (hyd) replies to Mohan 6 days ago

“yet another these are sour grapes story”

dasg replies to Mohan 7 days ago

Well Indian or for that matter local recruitment is based solely on your abilities, in India foremost your contacts. That is 1200million people, have not single University among top 100 let alone top ten in the world. They are now being beaten black and blue by China. You have dull people and lazy people, dull people vote along caste/parochial line people like Laloo, Maya, Mulayam, Kuruanidhi, Raja who support crooks like Sonia, Rahul. So its is dullness of mind that they adhere to divisive, highly detrimental and dangerous casteism. Lazy people are middle class who cant up their fat backside to participate in the electoral process even to the extent of casting vote.

DNA special: MoD audit questions DRDO functioning

DNA special: MoD audit questions DRDO functioning

Published: Wednesday, Aug 15, 2012, 10:00 IST

By Pradip R Sagar | Place: New Delhi | Agency: DNA

Years after the CAG tore into DRDO and its functioning, a special audit has once again exposed the organisation and its chief, VK Saraswat, blaming him for passing on funds to a society in a clear case of conflict of interest.

The audit, conducted on the orders of defence minister AK Antony, has come down on the ‘arbitrary’ functioning of the DRDO (Defence Research and Development Organisation).

The audit has highlighted questionable approval by scientific advisor to defence minister, Saraswat, of grant- in-aid of Rs2.9 crore to an academic institution he heads.

According to the report, accessed by the DNA, Saraswat sanctioned a grant of Rs2.88 crore to Hyderabad-based Advanced Institute of Mathematics, Statistics and Computer Science (AIMCS) for research of futuristic radar systems.

Raising infirmities in the sanction, the audit report says, “AIMCS comprises scientists known for their achievement in mathematics, statistics and computer sciences and is not even generally connected with research relating to futuristic radars. And it (AIMCS) does not have any equipment and other wherewithal to undertake such research and development.”

The report says DRDO’s Bangalore-based LRDE (Electronics and Radar Development Establishment) is specifically meant for the evolution of the technologies relating to radars and has required number of scientists and equipment for conducting research of radars.

“It was thus strange to entrust this work to a Hyderabad-based academic institute. Further scrutiny has revealed as the grantee body did not have expert manpower, it started recruiting them after getting money from DRDO, which was liberally disbursed on annual basis.”

The report claims that release of advance payment to the society even for salary in respect of non-existent manpower blocks government funds and provides an opportunity to private society to earn ‘interest income’.

“DRDO is hiring a consultant and the consultant is also planning to hire consultants. This does not seem to be reasonable. Whether recruited personnel had DRDO connection needs to be seen further.”

The internal audit report prepared by senior additional controller general of defence account (ACGDA-Internal audit) maintained that DRDO has undertaken research project relating to radars and part of this research project was offloaded to a private society.

“As such it is only a sub-project of a main project. These facts were not however brought out in the file concerned.”

Interestingly, the report has also questioned another grant-in-aid of Rs3 crore to Dr SB Rao of the same institute, who is co-principal investigator under this radar research project. “A comparison of cost estimates between two projects suggested the possibility of different norms being adopted for costing and possible duplication.”

Comments

Raghubir Singh from Pune

Mathematics and statistics are much relevant like computers in radars as should be evident from some books on the subject. As such on the face of it Advanced Institute of Maths, Statistics & Computer Sciences (AIMCS) seems to have adequate credentials to carry out research in these areas relating to radar engineering? Generally research scholars are hired only after funding is available. For achieving self- reliance in defence , which should be our top priority now , it would be essential to encourage academic and other reputed institutions to take up research in areas which can have military applications. This is the model for defence research followed in other advanced countries including in the US which should suit us too? Now that DRDO is notching successive successes on daily basis–discomfiture of import lobby is understandable and this leakage of secret audit report hopefully is not to slow down the momentum?

Reply | Report abuse       Posted on: Aug 17, 2012 6:34 IST

Raghubir Singh from Pune

Mathematics and statistics are much relevant like computers in radars as should be evident from some books on the subject. As such on the face of it Advanced Institute of Maths, Statistics & Computer Sciences (AIMCS) seems to have adequate credentials to carry out research in these areas relating to radar engineering? Generally research scholars are hired after funding is available. For achieving self- reliance in defence , which should be our top priority now after revelations how the import lobby has tentacles everywhere including in our DPSU’s, it would be essential to encourage academic and other reputed institutions to take up research in areas which can have military applications. This is the model for defence research followed in other advanced countries including in the US which should suit us too? Now that DRDO is notching successive successes on daily basis–discomfiture of import lobby is understandable and this leakage of secret audit report is not to slow down the momentum-hopefully?

Reply | Report abuse       Posted on: Aug 16, 2012 8:47 IST

Raghubir Singh from Pune

It is not correct to say that there is no connection between mathematics, statistics and computer with radar. We can glance through ‘Mathematics of Radar’ by Bill Moran to feel some impact of mathematics on radars. In fact there are large number of books on mathematics of radar, synthetic aperture radar & tracking radar etc. Similarly probability of detection & statistics thereof do form important aspects of radar and need to be explored. Therefore AIMSC with its mathematics, statistics & computer credentials should be able to do research in these important areas relating to radar Futuristic radar or any other such system can see the light of the day only if we encourage academic or research institutions –not necessarily only govt labs to explore domains which have defence applications. To carry out, presumably theoretical work to begin with –the Institute would not need radar system which if required should be available in DRDO labs in Hyderabad? Research work is not production line –it needs new thinking, newer approaches and interfacing of academic, institutional and defence research work for military usage. The auditors & learned author can see

the research models in US & other countries. For sure research scholars for the project can be recruited only after funds are available

Defence ministry report slams DRDO chief

Defence ministry report slams DRDO chief

14 Aug 2012Hindustan Times (Bhopal)

NEW DELHI: Defence Research and Development Organisation chief VK Saraswat sanctioned R2.8 crore to a mathematical society headed by him, an audit report has revealed. The report prepared by the defence ministry’s finance wing has also dealt with issues of transparency and shortcomings in projects developed by the organisation.

Defence ministry audit questions DRDO functioning

New Delhi: An internal audit report ordered by the defence ministry raised questions over the functioning of the DRDO and the grant of Rs 2.8 crore by its chief VK Saraswat to a society under him.

The report prepared by the finance wing of the defence ministry raised several issues in its review and the transparency of the research agency with a budget of over Rs 5,000 crore, defence sources said in New Delhi.

The report has questioned the grant of Rs 2.8 crore by Saraswat to a mathematical society.

The report has also pointed out that to avoid seeking approvals from the competent financial authorities, the DRDO was splitting the sanctions for its projects, they said.

It has also cited shortcomings in the products developed by the DRDO such as the Arjun tank, which has been found to be overweight by the Army for operations in certain areas along the border.

However, the DRDO said the issues raised in the report “are essentially in the nature of preliminary observations” and it was “vitiated by a faulty audit process”.

“Such preliminary observations are required to be formally issued and replies to the same should be sought prior to compilation of any report. Only if the replies are not satisfactory is the next step of making a preliminary report taken.

“In the extant case, the laid down procedure was not followed and to that extent, the process of audit stands vitiated. Thus, even before seeking replies of DRDO, presumption and baseless conclusions appear to have been arrived at,” DRDO spokesperson Ravi Gupta said.

PTI

DRDO ‘develops’ blatant financial irregularities

Published: Friday, Aug 17, 2012, 9:00 IST

By Pradip R Sagar | Place: New Delhi | Agency: DNA

The ministry of defence’s special audit has found blatant irregularities in the Defence Research Development Organisation’s handling of finances.

The special audit report, accessed by the DNA, reveals that financial sanctions are being split so that they do not require approval of higher authorities.

The audit carried out by Comptroller General of Defence Audit on the direction of defence minister AK Antony has found that key projects costing over Rs300 crore were tweaked by the DRDO to get them sanctioned without approaching the concerned financial authorities.

“DRDO authorities have sometimes used delegated powers to sanction supposedly new projects to complete the work taken up under ongoing projects, instead of going to the concerned financial authority for revision of cost of the old projects,” the audit report claims.

For instance, programme for development of main battle tank Arjun was sanctioned at Rs69.99 crore in November 2010. But the DRDO authorities changed the entire programme and split it into smaller sub-heads and several procurements were sanctioned under ‘build-up’ so that higher authorities within the system could be avoided. This shows that a coordinated attempt to avoid going to higher financial authorities, which is contrary to financial regulations,” the auditors observed.

Similarly, despite having a comprehensive five-year programme sanctioned for human performance enhancement in May 2009 at a cost of Rs34.56 crore, the director of Defence Institute of Physiology & Allied Sciences (DIPAS-DRDO), has managed to get approval for additional projects over the already sanctioned project. Such practice defeats the very purpose of making projects/programmes,” the report added.

Another project called ‘Product support and product improvement of NAG weapon system’ was sanctioned at a cost of Rs28.35 crore by VK Saraswat, director general of DRDO, despite the fact that the Cabinet Committee on Security approved similar programme was still in the pipeline.

Audit report also pointed out an unjustified cost reduction by DG, DRDO for a project for design and development of electro-optical sensors for air-borne platforms (UAV and Aerostat) at a cost of Rs49.82 crore.

“Director General, DRDO has reduced the cost from Rs70 crore as proposed to Rs49.82 crore so as to bring it just under Rs50 crore, which is his sanctioning power,” the special audit report claims.

Under scrutiny of accounts, the audit also found anomalies in facility for elctro-optical system testing (FACET). “FACET was sanctioned at a cost of Rs35 crore by DG, DRDO to create a facility, which is essentially required to meet the objectives of an already sanctioned project,” the report added.

The audit report also observed several split sanctions were issued for renovation of DRDO Bhawan in New Delhi while an unauthorised sanction of Rs49.15 crore to develop vehicle testing facility in Pune from public accounts mainly for civilian use was granted by the DRDO authorities

DRDO revamp still in doldrums

Rajat Pandit, TNN | Aug 13, 2012, 01.45AM IST

NEW DELHI: Like the unending developmental saga of Tejas light combat aircraft, now 30 years in the making, the much-touted revamp of the Defence Research and Development Organisation also seems to be progressing at a glacial pace.

Over four years after the Rama Rao Committee (RRC) submitted its report in February 2008, none of the major recommendations to make DRDO a better R&D organization capable of developing state-of-the-art weapon systems without time and cost overruns has been implemented.

Another committee led by the defence secretary subsequently watered down several steps suggested by the RRC to arrive at “a set of acceptable recommendations”. But even this “major DRDO restructuring plan”, grandiosely announced by the defence ministry in May 2010, is yet to see the light of day.

PM Manmohan Singh, last month, warned there was an urgent need to “change our current bureaucratic system” of administering scientific and technical departments.

“Organizationally too, DRDO should aim at becoming leaner and making the best use of its human, financial and technological resources,” he said.

With India still importing well over 60% of its military needs, experts feel it’s imperative to drastically overhaul the DRDO-defence PSU set-up as well as strongly push for private sector participation to build a strong domestic defence-industrial base.

But that seems a pipe dream. As part of the revamp of DRDO, which has an over Rs 10,500 crore annual budget, a new Defence Technology Commission (DTC) was to be established with defence minister A K Antony as its chairman. Quizzed about the delay, officials said “a note for the DTC has been initiated for the Union Cabinet’s approval”. DRDO, in turn, is pushing for an “empowered” DTC on the lines of the space and atomic energy commissions.

Writers’ Comments (1)

Rajat Pandit (New Delhi)

13 hrs ago

The recommendation for the creation of seven technology clusters (missile systems, aeronautics, armament & combat engineering, electronics & communication, material sciences, naval systems and life sciences), each headed by a director-general to ensure timely execution of major programmes, is also yet to take shape. Similarly, “notes for approval of the Cabinet” have so far only been “initiated” for the creation of a commercial arm of DRDO, which was to be created as a private limited company with Rs 2 crore as seed capital, and re-designation of the DRDO director-general as chairman

s_swamy (hyd) replies to rajatpandit

12 hrs ago

The IGMP of DRDO is one of the lone (partial)success story. Credit goes to Dr Kalam (for scientific & managerial inputs) and his successor Dr Saraswat et al for shear sweat. Elsewhere nothing much to brag about. LCA, Battle tank, artillery, torpedos… all are high priority where advanced countries may sell a few dozen, but India will end up a buyer for ever and cannot even find spares later. A very familiar story. DRDO’s effort? After 30 years of tardy development and a few thousand crores down the rat hole, wants to “tie-up” with a foreign know-how source. (Eg:GE for aeroengines, NPOE for Brahmos etc.).What next? No one appears to have any vision. Private companies are a huge let down. Some biggies have invested but Defence orders are far and few; they have shut shop or hiked the margins to keep alive. They have mostly tied-up with foreign suppliers and these items will be obsolete by the time they get first set of orders! They have no homegrown R&D back up, because they cannot find local talent or they don’t trust this. The picture is pathetic.

Raghubir Singh (pune) replies to rajatpandit

12 hrs ago

It is only good luck that RRC has been as slow as Tejas otherwise it would have created much chaos. All the successes we have been privy to in recent times from Agni to BMD’s- would perhaps have eluded us otherwise? Restructuring should be suggested by those who understand the basics of defence research & at least know how a gun fires and and what is the battle field environment. Best would be to have an internal review of the DRDO org structure by its senior CCR&D’s with some retired Directors and serving general rank officers & defence technologists and put up for review to the MoD.

Government baffled over DRDO chief’s claim on missile shield

Manoj Joshi   |   MAIL TODAY  |   New Delhi, July 18, 2012 |  

The government of India has been baffled by DRDO chief V.K. Saraswat’s repeated claims that a ballistic missile shield is ready for deployment, and that two locations, presumably New Delhi and Mumbai, will be the first recipients of the ballistic missile defence (BMD) system. Speaking on a TV programme in early May, Saraswat said that “this system is now ready for induction”. Nearly two weeks later, the claim was repeated in an interview to Press Trust of India where Saraswat was quoted as saying, “The ballistic missile defence shield is now mature… We are ready to put phase I in place.”

Only six tests have been carried out so far and there is no confirmation if they worked.

Well-known defence technology analyst Prasun K. Sengupta is sceptical; he bluntly terms the DRDO’s claims as “sheer unabashed jingoistic kite-flying by DRDO, period”.

Only six tests, that too in highly controlled conditions, have taken place so far and there is no independent confirmation of whether they have been successful. As of now it is not clear which of the three services will even man the system. Former joint director of the Centre for Air Power Studies, Air Vice-Marshal (retd.) Kapil Kak says, “It is indeed surprising why the IAF – as the national instrument vested with the responsibility of India’s air defence – was not closely involved from the proof-of-concept stage itself.”

Mail Today requested the DRDO to respond to a series of questions early last week, but had received no response till Tuesday.

According to the DRDO, six of its seven tests have been successful. But, instead of carrying them out in realistic conditions, they have been done in laboratory conditions so far. The usual test comprises of the launch of a “hostile missile” from the Interim Test Range in Chandipur on the Orissa coast, and the counter-launch of an interceptor missile from Wheeler Island just 70 km away. DRDO scientists say that the target missile that was intercepted in the test of February 2012, for example, mimicked a 2,000-km range missile of the type that Pakistan possesses, yet it was actually launched from 70 km away.

Equally important is the fact that the “target” missile is a liquid fuelled slow-moving Prithvi, and as of now the DRDO has not tested its system against its own solid-propelled missiles like Agni I or Agni II. As Sengupta puts it, “Its (the Prithvi’s) slow speed during both the boost phase and the terminal phase “does not in any way mimic the flight profiles of the solid-fuelled Theatre Ballistic Missiles and Intermediate Range Ballistic Missiles with both China and Pakistan.”

With nuclear weapons around, only a shield that will guarantee blocking every single missile is the only one worth having. As of now there is no indication that the DRDO, or any other country, can achieve such a goal. None of the DRDO’s claims have been verified by third parties, say, any of our armed forces. In contrast, China’s January 2010 test was authenticated by the Pentagon whose spokesman said, “We detected two geographically separated missile launch events with an exo-atmospheric collision also being observed by space-based sensors.”

The Indian BMD system is something of a puzzle. It was initially mooted by APJ Abdul Kalam in 1997 and taken up in the 2000s, when key technology relating to tracking, fire control and guidance radars became available from Israel, France and Russia. However, none of the three services ever expressed any requirement for such a system. Their need has been for a system to counter shorter ranged, theatre ballistic missiles and cruise missiles.

Non-proliferation experts are appalled at the lack of any visible political guidance to the BMD. The obvious response of an adversary to a missile shield is to field greater numbers of missiles with nuclear weapons; that seems to be the track Pakistan is following. Kak notes, “For an unstable and fragile state like Pakistan, India’s BMD could indeed be destabilising, as this would substantially reduce the value of Pakistan’s nuclear and missile arsenal, tempting it to increase the same.”

MIT scholar Christopher Clary argues that, “Indian policymakers must be willing to make the calculation that whatever safety comes from missile defences of dubious effectiveness outweighs the risks that come from a Pakistani nuclear arsenal that is larger than it would be without Indian missile defences.”

Of course, there is the other question. In its claims DRDO says that the system will be ready for “two places”, presumably Mumbai and Delhi. But what about Kolkata, Bangalore, Hyderabad, Lucknow and the rest of the country?

The government only has itself to blame for permitting a technology programme with such serious ramifications and not providing it any political guidance.

AK Antony seeks probe into allegations against Abhishek Verma in defence deals

Rohini Singh, ET Bureau May 7, 2012, 12.51AM IST

NEW DELHI: Defence minister AK Antony has asked investigation agencies to probe into charges levelled against Delhi-based businessman Abhishek Verma, by his former partner, accusing him of acting as a middleman in several defence deals and parking over $205 million in accounts in a bank in the US.

“I have asked the CBI and the Enforcement Directorate to investigate the allegations. The defence secretary has also been asked to take necessary action,” Antony said.
These allegations have been made by C Edmond Allen, head of a New York-based company called Ganton Limited, in a series of letters to Antony. His charges cover purported dealings between Ganton, which Allen – a non-practising attorney – said was incorporated in the US state of Delaware on Verma’s instructions, and major equipment suppliers to the Indian armed forces such as Rheinmettal, Augusta Westland, Hellenic Defence Systems and Hawker Beechcraft.

A top CBI official said the investigations were at a preliminary stage. “We are in touch with Allen and have asked him to submit the documents in original,” said the official. He also said the agency is coordinating with the Enforcement Directorate as there were allegations of large scale money laundering.

Verma, the son of former Congress leader Srikant Verma, is an accused in the naval war room leak case where several sensitive defence documents were stolen and allegedly leaked to Thales, the maker of Scorpene submarines.

He has denied all charges levelled against him by Allen, and said documents implicating him have been forged. Verma said he had received a notice from the Enforcement Directorate asking for an explanation for the money in the accounts but was unable to comment since the matter was sub judice.

“As several petitions filed by me against C Edmonds Allen are pending in various Indian and foreign courts and these cases are somehow connected to alleged foreign exchange violations in which trial is going on in India under FERA Act for ten years, it will not be possible for me to comment as matters are sub-judice,” he wrote.

According to Allen, the escrow accounts belong to Verma but he had the right to handle them as a result of agreements signed between the two in April 2000 and February 2004. Allen has alleged that the money in these accounts has been obtained through illegal means and that Verma has acted as a middleman in several defence deals. Verma, in turn, has issued legal notices to Allen to return the money and a case has been filed in a district court in New York, according to documents reviewed by ET.
Verma, the son of former senior Congress leader Srikant Verma and MP Veena Verma has business links with Jagdish Tytler, a Congress Working Committee member and the party’s Odisha in-charge. Tytler’s fashion designer son, Siddharth, is a founder shareholder in a company along with a former director of Ganton, Arjun Arora. Siddharth Tytler had also signed a joint venture agreement with Ganton India.

Confirming this Jagdish Tytler also told ET that he knew Verma as his parents were colleagues of his. He denied any knowledge of defence deals that Verma is alleged to be involved in.
Tytler also confirmed being an arbitrator in a dispute involving Ganton and another company over nearly hundred acre of land in Noida which belongs to the Yamuna Express Industrial Development Authority.

People close to Verma say that the allegations levelled against him were at Tytler’s behest, a charge that has been strongly denied by both Tytler and Allen. Allen, however, told ET in an email that Tytler and Verma were very close but had fallen out recently over the Noida land deal.

Allen has also alleged that Verma has often flaunted his links with several powerful politicians which has supposedly ensured that no enquiry is initiated against him. Allen also claims to posses several sensitive defence documents allegedly emailed to him by Verma which show his ‘easy access within the government’.

Corruption Charges

The letters to Antony paint a picture of labyrinthine corruption in defence deals with Verma allegedly at the centre. Some of the documents linked to the case, were publicly released by India Against Corruption (IAC) in late April, a group linked to activist Anna Hazare, after Allen sent the documents to lawyer Prashant Bhushan. In a blog posting in New York Times dated April 27, Allen was quoted as saying that he had approached it after Indian authorities showed no interest in his allegations.

In a letter to Antony dated March 28, 2012, Allen alleged that German firm, Rheinmetall AG, paid Ganton $530,000 to reverse its blacklisting by India’s defence ministry. The money was supposedly paid through the firm’s UBS account in Switzerland, according to bank statements of Ganton Limited, and an invoice generated by the company.

Emails sent by ET to Rheinmetall officials did not elicit a response.

The Missile that Cannot Fire – Long delays, cost escalation damage DRDO’s reputation

Amarnath K, Menon and  Gaurav C. Sawant – April 13, 2012 – India Today 

The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) was set up in 1958 with a vision to “provide our defence services a decisive edge by equipping them with internationally competitive systems and solutions”. The DRDO has clearly failed in its mission.

There is no bigger indictment of India‘s premier organisation for research and development in military hardware than the fact that 54 years after its establishment, India still imports 70 per cent of its equipment requirements. In 1997, India best known defence bureaucrat and the then scientific adviser to defence minister, APJ Abdul Kalam, had said that India should bring the hare of imports in defence equipment purchases down to 30 per cent by 2005. No progress has been made. The percentage is still 70-30 in favour of imports.

DRDO`s list of successes is short-primarily the Agni and Prithvi missiles. Its list of failures is much longer.The Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) project, which was commissioned in 2001, is running late by four years. The costs have gone up from an original estimate of around Rs 3,300 crore to over Rs 5,780 crore. The Kaveri Engine for LCA is running late by 16 years and the cost has escalated by around 800 per cent.
In 2011, the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) put a serious question mark on drdo’s capabilities. “The organisation, which has a history of its projects suffering endemic time and cost overruns, needs to sanction projects and decide on a probable date of completion on the basis of a conservative assessment of technology available and a realistic costing system,” its report stated.

The CAG report also revealed that not all technologies developed by DRDO were suitable for use by the armed forces. The three services have rejected 70 per cent of the products developed at the Armament Research and Development Establishment (ARDE), Pune, in the last 15 years costing Rs 320 crore because the products did not meet their standard and requirement, The CAG report stated that in order to form a fair and balanced view of the success of the projects undertaken by drdo, 46 completed and nine ongoing projects worth Rs 387.35 crore were scrutinised in February 2011. Of the 46 completed and closed projects, only 13 closed projects, wrapped up at a cost of Rs 68 crore, underwent production. “Without close synergy between the users and the technology development agency, much of the development efforts would go in vain, as the success rate of projects in ARDE amply demonstrates,” the report said.

The army is not impressed by DRDO`s performance either. Says Major-General S.V. Thapliyal, a former deputy director-general for perspective planning at army headquarters in Delhi, “DRDO promises to manufacture. It nixes our plans to acquire from abroad; It does not meet the deadline. Worse, it does not maintain quality either. The soldier, the end user, is the worst sufferer.”

General V.P. Malik, who was chief of army staff during the Kargil War, has an interesting incident to narrate in his book Kargil From Surprise to Victory. In 1997, the army finalized plans to acquire the AN/TPQ-37 Fire finder radars from the US. Prices were negotiated and just before purchase, drdo offered to manufacture them at half the price and within two years. The government shot down the army’s plans to buy these radars. In 1999, during the Kargil War, the radars were desperately needed. Neither had DRDO manufactured them nor could they be procured from the US (post-1998 Pokhran tests there was an arms embargo). Several lives were lost in Pakistani shelling. Wlien Indo-US relations improved, India did buy these radars in 2003, but at almost twice the initial price. “The problem with drdo is that it is big on promise and small on delivery. There is no accountability in the system,” says Malik.

DRDO continues to mislead. On April 4, it claimed it had achieved a major milestone on an “indigenous” programme to develop a sophisticated radar to monitor the Indian airspace. The aircraft on which the radar is mounted—a modified Embraer EMB 1451-is imported from Brazil. drdo had to resort to the Embraer aircraft because its own efforts at producing an indigenous carrier had ended in disaster. Project Guardian Airawat was stalled in 1999 when its HS-748 turboprop aircraft crashed, killing eight crew members-engineers, scientists and Indian Air Force (IAF) officers-on board.
Under a Rs 1,050 crore agreement, Brazil’s Embraer will now act as the pverall systems integrator for the “indigenous” project, supplying the three jets, mounting the radar and electronics onto the plane’s fuselage and ensuring that the altered jets retain acceptable flight performance.

According to its original 2004 timeline, this project was to be completed by 2011. Now the delivery of the remaining two modified Embraer aircraft is only expected by mid-2013. The project will not be complete until 2014. Even then there are serious flaws in the project. IAF has pointed out that the Embraer EMB 1451 cannot fly above 4 0,000 ft and therefore is only of limited use in surveillance. “DRDO has a history of claiming foreign designs as its own, like the Arjun tank which is a derivative of the German Leopard,” says a source in the agency. ~
The technology development agency is also largely responsible for the fact highlighted by General V.K. Singh that 97 per cent of the army’s air defence is obsolete. The CAG report lists seven requirements of the army for air defence guns and the project status report. CAG notes the end result: “Even though three R&D projects and one staff project were undertaken, the air defence gun system could not be developed by DRDO to satisfy the frequently revised requirement of the user.”

Army air defence sources say DRDO is tinkering with World War II equipment instead of working on cutting-edge technology. “The chief downplayed the state of affairs. It is in dire straits,” says a top-ranking air defence officer.

“The air defence is in a very-sorry condition,” says Air Marshal A.K. Singh, former air officer commanding-in-chief, Western Air Command. “DRDO is not able to service the equipment. Even if systems are acquired from abroad and DRDO or Hindustan Aeronautics Limited is meant to service it, it fails.This leaves critical gaps in national defence,” he says.

The Government had constituted a committee for the first-ever external review of the agency in February 2007. The committee chaired by P. Rama Rao, ex‘secreta1y, Department of Science and Technology and former director, Defence Metallurgical Research Laboratory, Hyderabad, suggested that DRDO be restructured to make it a leaner organisation. It also recommended the setting up of a commercial arm of the organisation to make it a profitable entity, besides cutting back on delays in completing projects. “Delivery delayed is delivery denied,” said
Defence Minister A.K. Antony on delays in DRDO projects. But little progress has been made in the last five years on implementing the committee’s suggestions.

DRDO chief V.K. Saraswat is eager to put his house in order. He has called for the setting up of a Defence Technology DRDO chief V.K. Saraswat is eager to put his house in order. He has called for the setting up of a Defence Technology Commission as well as a bigger role for DRDO in picking production partners for products developed by the agency. Instead of the current practice of the Ministry of Defence arbitrarily nominating a defence public sector undertaking or an ordnance factory to build the product, usually when development is almost complete, DRDO would be able to select a capable partner company from the outset, from the private sector if necessary.

The defence organisation, which has an annual budget of over Rs 10,000 crore, now has no choice but to reinvent itself. The agency‘s research has drifted away from its core competence in recent times. It has been accused of “wasting time and precious resources” being engaged in research and development of technique for detection of pesticides in fruits, technology for dengue control, dental implants, foldable stretchers and berry juice.
The moribund agency is also suffering from employee attrition. Over the past five years, while the report of the Rama Rao Committee has languished, around 1,700 of its 7,900 engineers and scientists have left for better opportunities in private companies. The depletion of talent will be the last stage in what cynical insiders say is the process of converting DRDO into a dodo.

CBI to grill MoD officials in Tatra case

New Delhi, April 26, 2012, DHNS:
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) is likely to quiz Defence Ministry officials in connection to the alleged irregularities in the supply of all-terrain tatra trucks to the Army.

Sources said the CBI has zeroed in on at least six Defence Ministry officials.

Besides, the CBI is planning to question BEML CMD V R S Natarajan once again, sources said, adding that the investigating officers were not convinced with Natarajan’s responses in the previous grilling session.

Meanwhile, the CBI has once again questioned Vectra Chairman Ravinder Rishi and some of his associates in connection with the surreptitious deal. The probe agency however clarified that besides Rishi, none of the persons questioned till now, is an accused in the case. “They are being questioned just to clarify facts of the case,” CBI officials said.

Tatra Sipox UK, owned by Rishi, had inked a deal with BEML in 1997, which was in alleged violation of defence procurement rules that specified “procurement should be done directly from original equipment manufacturer only.” The central probe agency has alleged that since Tatra Sipox UK was not the original manufacturer of the all-terrain trucks, the rule for defence procurements was violated.

Background check on Tejinder by CBI

Neeraj Chauhan, TNN | Apr 25, 2012, 05.15AM IST

NEW DELHI: Probing the Tatra trucks procurement scam, the Central Bureau of Investigation is carrying out a background check on Lt Gen (Retd) Tejinder Singh as it prepares to question him later this week. The agency, sources said, has asked the defence ministry to provide all details related to Lt Gen Singh – files, his meetings and people who frequently met him. Sources said the agency was trying to establish Vectra chief Ravi Rishi’s link with Lt Gen Singh.

“To establish the bribery offer, we have to find out Lt Gen Tejinder Singh’s link with Vectra group. We will check files of MoD to know about people who visited him and documents signed by him when he was serving in the Army,” a top CBI officer said. The agency is also expected to convert the preliminary enquiry into the alleged bribery offer to Army chief General V K Singh into a regular case soon.

The agency has, meanwhile, collected around 64 files from Bharat Earth Movers Limited (BEML) to probe the Tatra scam. These files have details of proposals, tenders papers, technical examination documents, suppliers, supply orders and payments related to procurement of Tatra trucks since 1997 in the Indian Army. To understand these documents, two colonel rank officers are helping the CBI in the probe.

The agency is also looking at the “quid pro quo” angle in the Tatra procurement deal. It is probing whether somebody in the defence ministry or Army benefitted all these years for making sure that Tatra trucks were procured by BEML through Tatra Sipox (UK) only.

Meanwhile, the CBI on Tuesday again questioned Vectra executive Anil Mansaramani at its headquarters while another Vectra employee was quizzed in Mumbai. The Vectra employees are being confronted with several documents picked up from the defence ministry and BEML.

The Army chief has provided several documents to the agency and has assured that he would give more evidence. Gen Singh had claimed that Lt Gen Tejinder Singh had offered him a bribe of Rs 14 crore in his office on September 22, 2010 for clearing a tranche of sub-standard Tatra trucks. The agency has recorded the chief’s statement.

Tatra case: Rishi’s money trail leads CBI to UK

CNN-IBN India | Updated Apr 08, 2012 at 09:46pm IST

New Delhi: The CBI is looking into the payments made by defence PSU BEML to Tatra Sipox UK for the supply of all terrain trucks and plans to send judicial request to the United Kingdom seeking details of its financial transactions and ownerships.
The agency suspects that payments from BEML were actually going to a tax haven, CBI sources said, adding that they are probing into it but added that the investigations are in preliminary stage.
The sources said at present they are likely to send Letters Rogatory to the UK seeking information on financial transactions of Tatra Sipox UK in which Vectra Chairman Ravinder Rishi has been a Director, owning substantial shares.
The agency will also demand details of Tatra Sipox UK’s association with Czech-republic based Tatra a.s, they said.
Rishi has refuted allegations of any wrong doing and is said to be co-operating with the agency during his questioning sessions during last week, the sources said.
The CBI is now focusing on the role of officials of Defence Ministry, BEML and army and may question them in connection with the case soon, they said.
The sources said it was in 1997 that Tatra Sipox UK signed the truck supply deal with BEML which was in alleged violation of defence procurement rules which say that procurement should be done directly from original equipment manufacturer only.
The CBI has alleged that since Tatra Sipox UK was not the original manufacturer of these all terrain trucks, the rule that defence procurements should be made from original
manufacturer was violated.
Meanwhile, Czech Republic-based Tatra a.s. had said in a statement that it supplies for India various truck components (“CKDs”) that make up approximately 30 to 35 per cent of a complete vehicle.
“The remaining components are made or supplied by other manufacturers or by BEML, an Indian government controlled company that also assembles the Tatra branded vehicles and then sells and delivers them to customers within India under license agreement for Tatra a.s,” it had said in a statement.
It had also stated that neither Ravi Rishi nor his investment company Vectra Limited, control or have controlled — directly or indirectly — Tatra a.s. “The British company Vectra Limited is a minority stakeholder in Tatra holdings and in principle holds one of
the four votes.
“Nonetheless, Tatra will request from Mr Rishi and Vectra Limited an explanation of the information about any initiated investigation of him and Vectra Ltd by Indian Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) as it relates to sales of products branded with the ‘Tatra’ name,” it had said in a statement.