Tag Archives: Dehradun-248008

Drdo

RTI- CVO, MOD for Vigilance inquiry status of DMSRDE, Kanpur

Leave a comment
To                                                                                                  23rd July 2014
Sh. Samir Ranjan Amin,
U/Secretary &  CPIO,
Room No – 340, Office of Director of Vigilance,
B- Wing Sena Bhawan,
Rajaji Marg, New Delhi -110105

Hello,

Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 in respect of complaints against Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director, DMSRDE, Kanpur and as per CVC the complaints has been sent to CVO, MOD for further action, with reference No. 1323/2014/Vigilance 9, 3617/2014/Vigilance 9, 5022/2014/Vigilance 9, 13248/2014/Vigilance 9, etc.

  1. Please provide the present status of all my complaints received by your office till date from CVC.
  2. Please provide the copy of replies received from DRDO by CVO, MOD in respect of my complaints.
  3. Please provide the copies of your forwarding letter to DRDO in respect of my all complaints.

 

Regards

Prabhu Dandriyal
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun-248008
Phone – 0135- 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,
e-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com  website – www.corruptionindrdo.com

Registration Number      MODEF/R/2014/61312

Uncategorized

RTI-BrahMos Aerospace, has bagged orders worth Rs 25,000 crore from the Indian defence forces.

Leave a comment
To                                                                                            3 June 2014
Sh A. M. Manichan,
Under Secretary (IC-IV), CPIO,
Ministry of Defence,
Department of Defence,
Sena Bhavan, New Delhi

Hello,

Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 in respect to reports published in various leading paper like The Hindu Buisnessline on 30 July 2013, BrahMos, the world’s first supersonic cruise missile developed by the Indo-Russian joint venture BrahMos Aerospace, has bagged orders worth Rs 25,000 crore from the Indian defence forces.

  1. Please provide whether MOD, Govt of India placed such Rs 25000 crores order to Indo-Russian joint venture BrahMos Aerospace duly approved by Government of India. Yes or No.
  2. If yes then provide the date of such approval and names of committee members who have approved the above mentioned order.
  3. Provide the delivery period of above order of BrahMos Aerospace.
  4. Provide the information regarding this ordered product whether it will be manufactured fully or partially in India.
  5. Provide the information of till date whether BrahMos Aerospace manufactured any mentionable (not hook type things) parts of supersonic cruise missile in India.
  6. Amount of export orders received by BrahMos Aerospace till date.
Regards
Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun-248008
Phone – 0135- 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,
e-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com  website – www.corruptionindrdo.com
 
Registration Number             MODEF/R/2014/61026
Drdo

Request for Nobel Prize Recommendation for Dr A K Saxena, Director, DMSRDE, Kanpur

3 Comments
To                                                                                           Date 15th January 2014
Sh Avinash Chander,
DG, DRDO, Secretary, R&D,
Scientific Adviser to Raksha Mantri,
DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg,
New Delhi – 110105

Congratulations, as reported in today’s Hindustan “Daily Hindi News Paper” Director, DMSRDE, Dr. A K Saxena claimed that they developed a chemical compound which can withstand 2000 °C & more. In fact the claim of the said compound has surpassed the limit of the compound used for heat shielding of space shuttle.

The Space Shuttle thermal protection system (TPS) is the barrier that protected the Space Shuttle Orbiter during the searing 1,650 °C (3,000 °F) heat of atmospheric reentry. A secondary goal was to protect from the heat and cold of space while on orbit.

So, this website request you to become member secretary of the committee headed by top Indian chemist Bharat Ratna Professor CNR Rao with members of Honorable Prime Minister and Honorable Defence Minister and recommend the innovation of Dr A K Saxena for Nobel Prize 2014 in Chemistry.

With Good Wishes

Prabhu Dandriyal,
21- Sunderwala, Raipur,
DEHRADUN- 248008, UTTARAKHAND
www.corruptionindrdo.com, prabhu@gmail.com
Drdo

Height of Nepotism

1 Comment

Today 10th January 2014 at 1200 Hrs Sh R C Agarwal, Director, DEAL rushed to IRDE to have meeting with Chairman ASCODAR to influence him and his team members.

He requested to Chairman, ASCODAR to sealed Sh R K Agarwal, Scientist’H’ as Sh R K Agarwal is his blue eyed boy.

The committee was influenced to use a word “Normalization” of APAR Marks.

The aim was to create an impression that the hatred shown by Sh R K Agarwal towards Schedule Cast community is shadowed by the word “Normalization”.

However, the intention of Sh R K Agarwal and Sh R C Agarwal and their hatred towards Schedule Cast community is not over sighted.

They have to assured and submit their apology to Sh Jagdish Kumar, T O ‘C’ and his spouse because last eight months they gone through mental agony. The way Sh R K Agarwal downgraded APAR marks without mentioning a single reason.  Sh Jagdish Kumar, T O ‘C’ got clear signal that in early years during 2005 to 2007 when Sh R K Agarwal his recommended authority deprived him from promotion.

It is very common in DRDO because of absolute power of DRDO Directors and his trusted men (Chamchas) ignore all laid down rules of government of India.

However, honorable supreme court taken very serious view on the irresponsible senior officials who have tried to play with the provision of Indian Constitution.

It is requested to Honorable Raksha Mantri to look into the matter and give necessary directive to SA to RM.

Regards

Prabhu Dandriyal
21- Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun-248008
Prabhudoon@gmail.com
www.corruptionindrdo.com
09411114879, 0135-2787750

Date  10th January 2014

Drdo

RTI- DMSRDE – M/s Manglam Traders, Kanpur

Leave a comment
To,
Shri Sarvesh Kumar
Scientist ‘F’
Central Public Information Officer
DMSRDE, GT Road
Kanpur-208013

                    Subject: Application under Right to Information Act 2005

Sir,

Kindly provide the following information u/s 6(1) of RTI Act 2005.

INFORMATION SOUGHT

  1. Provide the following information in respect of Tender Reference No. DMSRDE/13552064 published on website of DRDO.(Copy Enclosed)
    1. Comparative Statement of Tender duly approved by SPC and Director.
    2. Name of vendor/firm/trader (L1) to which Supply Order was issued.
    3. Provide copy of supply order issued against this tender enquiry.

    Cost of the material purchased against supply order under above mentioned tender reference

  2. Provide following information in respect of business carried out by M/s Manglam Traders, Kanpur in DMSRDE, Kanpur.
    1. Registration Certificate issued to M/s Manglam Traders, Kanpur by DMSRDE, Kanpur.
    2. As per provisions of Rule 3.2 of Purchase Management 2006 of DRDO in which  categories of stores, e.g., raw materials, chemicals, machine tools, instruments, electronics and electrical items, timber, fabrication jobs and other general stores etc., the M/s Manglam Traders, Kanpur is registered in DMSRDE, Kanpur.
    3. Total cost of supply orders placed in the year 2009 and 2010.
    4. Total cost of supply orders placed from 1st January 2011 to 31st October 2013.
    5. Copies of supply orders placed to Manglam Traders from 01.01.2011 to 31.10.2013.
    6. Number of repeat order placed to Manglam Traders and copies of  supply orders issued for repeat order
  3. Provide the copy of supply order placed against DMSRDE Case No. 13PDD014 dated 25.04.2012 initiated by Production Division.
  4. Provide amount in Kg of Polydimethylsilane(PDMS) purchased in the period.
    1. 01.01.2009 to 31.12.2010
    2. 01.01.2011 to 31.10.2013
    3. Likely to be purchased(Supply Order placed)
  5. Copies of bills submitted by M/s Manglam Traders to DMSRDE, Kanpur against supply orders and repeat orders placed to M/s Manglam Traders, Kanpur.

The information related to purchase, supply orders, bills etc. has already been allowed by FAA, DRDO vide his decision No. RTI/02/2091/F/2013/0142 dated 14 October 2013 in First Appeal No. 142 on First Appeal of applicant.

This is to inform that Central Information Commission in its various decisions consistently held that establishment matters relating to the organization notified u/s 24 of the RTI Act come within the purview of the Act and information in this regard thereto are not exempted from disclosure.

Besides purchase and establishment matter the information sought is pertaining to allegations of Corruption and as such not exempted u/s 24 of RTI Act 2005.

An IPO of Rs. 10/- as application fee (IPO No. 17F548630 ) is enclosed as Annexure-1.

Date: 10 November, 2013                                                

(Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal)
 21-Sunderwala, Raipur
 Dehradun-248008
Uttarakhand                     

Annexure:-

  1. 1.    IPO of Rs. 10/- , with IPO No. 17F548630 as application Fee.                
Drdo

RTI – CSD – DMSRDE

Leave a comment
To,
Shri Sarvesh Kumar
Central Public Information Officer
DMSRDE, GT Road
Kanpur-208013                    

Subject: Application under Right to Information Act 2005

Sir,

Kindly refer to following decisions of Central Information Commission and verdict given in these decisions.

  1. File No. CIC/LS/A/2012/002612 dated 22.3.2013 (Dr. Neelam Bhalla vs. DRDO) Verdict – “It is, no doubt, true that DRDO is an exempted organisation; yet it has been the consistent view of this Commission that the benefit of exemption extends only to functional / operational matters and not to establishment related routine matters. The legality of this view has not been challenged in the relevant judicial forum so far”.
  2. CIC/LS/A/2010/000107 dated 26.4.2010 (Ms. K. Surya Kumari Vs DRDO)
  3. CIC/SM/C/2008/00054/LS dated 29.01.2010 (Ms. K. Surya Kumari Vs DRDO)
  4. CIC/LS/A/2012/002487 dated 31.12.2012 ( Ms. Savitha Vs DRDO)

In its various decisions CIC consistently held that Establishment Matters relating to the organization notified u/s 24 of the RTI Act come within the purview of the Act and information in this regard thereto are not exempted from disclosure.

In light of the above decisions of CIC, Kindly provide the following information under RTI Act 2005. 

BRIEF FACTS FOR APPLICATION UNDER RTI ACT 2005

With reference to your Minute Sheet No. AE/Gen Admin/13/0578 dated 26 September 2013 and modified Minute Sheet No. AE/Gen Admin/13/0578 dated 04 October 2013, signed by Dr. D.N. Tripathi, Addl Director (Admin.) on behalf of Director.

  1. It has been ordered by these Minute Sheets that “wef 01.10.2013 all officers and employees are informed to park their vehicles in the Parking Area constructed near CSD Canteen” and “above Minute Sheet is related to the officers/employees who goes to CSD Canteen for purchasing items by their vehicles”.
  2. Facts narrated above in points (1) and (2) establish that CSD Canteen building exists in DMSRDE and CSD facility is available in DMSRDE

In light of above facts kindly provide following information u/s 6(1) of RTI Act 2005.

INFORMATION SOUGHT

  1. Provide the details of officers and staff with name & rank that are attached and involved in management and operation of DMSRDE CSD Canteen right from Chairman, Officer-In- Charge, Technical Officers and Staff at present.dmsrde csd table1
  2.  Total monthly expenditure incurred on incentives/emoluments to official working part time in DMSRDE CSD Canteen for month July 2013.
  3. Provide the amount of miscellaneous expenditure incurred in July 2013 under following heads in DMSRDE CSD Canteen.
  4. dmsrde csd table2Balance sheet of DMSRDE CSD Canteen for the month July 2013.
  5. Provide details of funds available with DMSRDE CSD Canteen in its Current A/C at SBI DMSRDE Branch Kanpur and all Fixed Deposits pledged with this Current account at SBI DMSRDE Branch.
  6. The competent authority responsible for attachment of officials at CSD Canteen.
  7. Whether rotation of officials working in CSD Canteen took place vide CVC Circular No.03/09/13 letter No.004/VGL/090/225753 dated 11.9.2013. (Yes/No).
  8. If answer to point (7) is yes then provide the maximum period for which an official could remain attached with CSD Canteen?
  9. Mr. DP Shukla, Lab. Attd. (Now Technical Officer) is attached/posted in DMSRDE CSD Canteen since long time. Provide his attachment/posting detail in DMSRDE CSD Canteen from 01.01.2000 to 30 September 2013.
  10. DMSRDE CSD Canteen is a profitable unit which earning good amount of money by getting commission/profit in sale of store items at canteen. In which account this money is being deposited and the name of officers who are authorize/responsible to withdraw the money.
  11. Provide type /nature of purpose for which the fund of CSD can be utilized.
  12. Can CSD fund be utilized for purchase of item/store/services that are not used by CSD Canteen instead used by DMSRDE officials like furniture, construction of aluminum, partitions, distribution of gifts etc.?
  13. Provide sales statement of DMSRDE Canteen for month of July 2013.
  14. Cheque No. 871271 dated 22.7.2013 issued by DMSRDE Canteen. Provide information in following format.
  15. dmsrde csd table3Cheque No. 871267 with payable amount of Rs. 214312.00 was issued by DMSRDE Canteen (CSD) in July 2013. Provide following information in this regard-
    1. Name of the firm/vendor in favor of which cheque No. 871267 with payable amount of Rs. 214312.00 was issued.
    2. Purpose of issue of the cheque No. 871267 of DMSRDE Canteen (CSD) with amount of Rs. 214312.00 in July 2013.
    3. List of items purchased through cheque No. 871267 issue by DMSRDE Canteen (CSD) for amount Rs. 214312.00 in July 2013.
    4. User of the items purchased vide cheque No. 871267 issued for Rs. 214312/-.
    5. The items purchased vide cheque No. 871267 has been kept in which place.
    6. Copy of bill of vendor/firm for supply of items against cheque No. 871267 issued by DMSRDE Canteen (CSD) with amount of Rs. 214312.00 in July 2013.
  16. Whether any fund was withdrawn from account of DMSRDE Canteen for purpose of aluminum door and grill partition in Security Division Building at reception counter.(Yes/No)
  17. If answer to point (16) is yes then provide the expenditure details for the said work at reception of Security Office.
  18. If answer to point(16) is No, then provide the following details
    1. The agency (DMSRDE/MES) which issue supply order to accomplish the task for aluminum partition at reception of Security Office.
    2. The name of vendor who make aluminum partition at reception of Security Office.
    3. The copy of supply order issued for making the aluminum partition at reception of Security Office.
    4. Total expenditure involved in construction of aluminum partition at reception of Security Office.
  19. Provide copy of statement of expenditure for Rs. 255248.00 from 01.07.2013 to 31.07.2013 under Miscellaneous Head for month of July 2013 in DMSRDE Canteen (CSD).
  20. Whether audit of CSD Canteen accounts took place by Local Audit Officer (LAO)/ACDA on annual basis. Yes/No
  21. If answer to point 20 is yes then provide the copy of audit report of DMSRDE CSD Canteen for FY 2012-2013.
  22. Percentage of average profit in sale of items/store at DMSRDE CSD Canteen.
  23. Average profit of DMSRDE CSD Canteen in rupees  per month in FY 2012-13.
  24. How much funds/money has been expenditure in welfare activities from CSD fund in FY 2012-2013?

The information sought in this RTI Application is on Establishment Matter and as such not exempted u/s 24 of the RTI Act.

Besides Information sought is pertaining to allegations of Corruption and as such not exempted u/s 24 of the RTI Act 2005.

An IPO of Rs. 10/- as application fee (IPO No. 17F 549286) is annexed as Annexure-1.

 (Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal)
21-Sunderwala, Raipur
Dehradun-248008
Uttarakhand           
prabhudoon@gmail.com, www.corruptionindrdo.com        

Annexure:-

  1. IPO of Rs. 10/- , with IPO No.  17F 549286  as application Fee.
Drdo

Foundation Laid for Recruitment Scam in DRDO

4 Comments
To,                                                                                                                  26rd  October 2013
Sh Avinash Chandra
DG (R&D),DRDO,SA to RM, Secretary DRDO
DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg
New Delhi -110105
 

Subject: Foundation Laid for Recruitment Scam in DRDO

CEPTAM was constituted with aim and objective to recruit the technical/ scientific/ admin allied man power, who can be the workforce in major national DRDO projects.

DRDO Hqrs made it a mockery and laughing object. DRDO has violated SRO from beginning of CEPTAM and there are several cases pending in CAT/High courts all across the India.

The recent recruitment drive tells a different story.

CEPTAM – 06 Advertisement Published in Employment News dated 04-10th May, 2013.

No of post advertised in various categories – 844

Approximately 5 lakhs application received (excluding hundreds of applications misplaced)

Approximately 1 lakh applications were rejected for silly reasons (example followed)

Approximately 2 lakhs candidates not able to appear for examination held on 25th August 2013

Approximately 3 lakhs candidates deprived by Sh Rajesh Goyal, Director, CEPTAM

It is very big question, how DRDO can give permission to Sh Rajesh Goyal, Director, CEPTAM to play with fundamental right of young citizen of India.

Please go through the following facts which clearly shows Sh Rajesh Goyal’s, Director, CEPTAM personal vested interest

  1. The SMS game – All interested candidates who wish to apply for DRDO Entry Test, are compulsorily required to register themselves on mobile no. 56677 of CEPTAM by sending a SMS in this format CEPTAM First choice of Exam City Code Post Code Date of Birth as ddmmyy NAME (Leaving a space between first, middle and last name) Example: CEPTAM 15 0112 231283 Rupesh Kumar Goyal (Name of Director’s son, it is example of pure chamchagiri environment of CEPTAM). Why this SMS system introduced by Sh Rajesh Goyal, Director, CEPTAM

Approximately 5 Lakhs application received and each applicant paid Rs 3 for each SMS registration.

Total money received by CEPTAM 15 Lakhs

The contract was cooked with M/s MILLENNIUM SYSTEMS  a computer peripheral supplier and well connected with Sh Rajesh Goyal since he was in ISSA. Anyone can verify these things with back record of firms supply orders vs with Sh Rajesh Goyal’s involvements. The M/s MILLENNIUM SYSTEMS website http://milsys.co.in is shown the order of client list. If 5 lakhs applicants registered the money was huge 15 Lakhs and in open market bulk SMS service providers 6 to 7 paisa /SMS so any one can work out the play in this contract. The CEPTAM  did not give this contract through DAVP shows the corruption angle.

  • No approval from competent authority to induct compulsory Mobile registration.
  • No tender floated by CEPTAM for bulk SMS service providing
    • No minimum 7 vendors address procurement policy of DRDO followed (Limited tender)
  • CEPTAM was not approached to DAVP empanelled SMS bulk service provider

M/s MILLENNIUM SYSTEMS – Provides -Selling of Computers & Related Peripherals such as :Range of Desktops / Servers – IBM / HP / COMPAQ / ACER etc.Range of POS and Kiosk / Billing Machines – Panasonic / Epson,Multimedia Products e.g. Video & Audio Processing Cards, Website designing and hosting. Man power Solutions / Recruitment Solutions /Data Entry. Annual maintenance contracts (AMC)

CEPTAM Website FAQ

Q-6.     Is it necessary to send application after registering through SMS?

A-6.     YES. Without registration number application will not be accepted. It is FIRST STEP for Applying for any post. (Note: Register for each post code separately if you are applying for more than one post code and get registration for each post code.)

Q-9.     I have submitted my application on prescribed format but could not register myself through SMS. Whether my application will be considered?

A-9.  NO; Applications received without registration number are liable to be rejected. Prior registration is mandatory for all posts, candidates applying for.

Application form the marked box for office use only
Application form the marked box for office use only

 

In above application form the marked box for office use only so hundreds of candidates not filled the SMS registration, result in this basis CEPTAM rejected their applications, who is responsible. Is DRDO ready to repay the money/time wasted by individuals?

Question is whether this kind of provision for like diesel mechanic posts and for SC/ST candidates who belong to rural areas and do not have access or are familiar with internet to verify or clear their issues, is allowed by government of India?

Example rejection of application due to SMS Registration

Example rejection of application due to SMS Registration
Example rejection of application due to SMS Registration

 

2.      The CEPTAM asked applications by ordinary post and other option were put in 2 boxes in both gates of Metcalf House and 1 box in front of CEPTAM entrance. There was no mechanism to acknowledge applications. So what happened to hundreds of hundreds candidates who spent their days in front of CEPTAM reception but could not get their admit cards because simply they were told that their application was not found. If so then CEPTAM should show their accounts about how many postal orders they enchased against each application. The total number of available applications & postal orders will never match. There is no other example in entire government of India or PSU, Banks where application acknowledgement mechanism is not applied. CEPTAM violated fundamental right of young citizens of India.

Example  application – not received /found

Example application – not received /found
Example application – not received /found

Example  application – not received /found

Example application – not received /found
Example application – not received /found

3.   Approximately 2 lakhs candidates could not appear due to wrongly assigned examination centres. It is not possible that the huge number of candidates themselves asked for the centre, this whole thing is deliberately done by CEPTAM on the direction of Sh Rajesh Goyal or otherwise it is clearly proved that he is incompetent to handle such a task. Please find some examples of admit cards issued by CEPTAM.

post5    In Application centre city code clearly mentioned – 09 (Delhi NCR)

Admit Card centre city code given – Ranchi (Code -24)
Admit Card centre city code given – Ranchi (Code -24)

Admit Card centre city code given – Ranchi (Code -24)

In Application centre city code asked – 09 (Delhi NCR) Given Kanpur (Code 16)
In Application centre city code asked – 09 (Delhi NCR) Given Kanpur (Code 16)

In Application centre city code asked – 09 (Delhi NCR) Given Kanpur (Code 16)

In Application centre city code asked – 09 (Delhi NCR) Given Ahmedabad (Code 02)
In Application centre city code asked – 09 (Delhi NCR) Given Ahmedabad (Code 02)

In Application centre city code asked – 09 (Delhi NCR) Given Ahmedabad (Code 02)

Wrong date of birth, wrong post code entered by data entry firms
Wrong date of birth, wrong post code entered by data entry firms

In Application centre city code asked – 09 (Delhi NCR) Given Ahmedabad (Code 02)4.

4.       Although CEPTAM corrected some centre errors and provided that list on the website but numbers (First list -89, http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/ceptam/CityChangeList.pdf second list 54 http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/ceptam/CityAndPCDlist.pdf) were few in respect to the numbers of candidates who were not able to appear i.e. 2 Lakhs.

5.         There are many example in which any one can see, how Sh Rajesh Goyal, Director chose data entry firms who played with the future of young India.

Examples

post10

Photo placed wrongly by data entry firm and Centre wrong
Photo placed wrongly by data entry firm and Centre wrong
Photo Lalita and name in admit card Rajnish Kumar
Photo Lalita and name in admit card Rajnish Kumar

6.       In one of my RTIs, I have requested information regarding selection boards’ expert members, because it is observed that Sh Rajesh Goyal, Director, CEPTAM engaged his wife, his co-brother and other blood relation persons as expert in different selection boards all over India. Like Dr Madhu (Madhuri) Goyal , Mr M C Goyal,  Mr Sekher Gupta,  Mr Anupam Gupta . The act of Sh Rajesh Goyal, Director, CEPTAM assigning his relatives as experts violated the laid down rules CCS rules. No prior approval from competent authority was taken in this regards. This act can give liberty to do manipulation in recruitment. My RTI dated 2nd May 2013 and CPIO, CEPTAM Reply is enclosed here with for your ready reference. (Assessment Boards and Recruitment Board constituted in the year 2012) This mechanism is also following in recent recruitment drive. (RTI request and reply of CPIO, CEPTAM enclosed herewith for your ready reference.)

7.        Please find enclosed list of the name and phone numbers of some candidates from whom you can visualize how CEPTAM, DRDO played with the future of young Indians for their own vested interest. (List enclosed as annexure)

Sir, above all examples are enough evidences to investigate the CEPTAM-06 recruitment drive, beside this lot of complaint already received by honorable Defence Minister and various authorities. The CEPTAM director putting his efforts to diluting and burring the subject matter. It is requested kindly do needful urgently for the future of young citizens of India.

Sir, please put your all sincere efforts to stop the corruption in CEPTAM. The approximately 3 lakhs youths are waiting for your honest decision to get fair chance of selection. Do something to maintain prestige of DRDO.

Regards

 Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal
21-Sunderwala, Raipur
Dehradun-248008
Uttarakhand
Cell No- 9411114879, Landline- 0135-2787750
e-mail- prabhudoon@gmail.com, website – www.corruptionindrdo.com

 

Enclosed

  1. Copy of my RTI request to CPIO,CEPTAM dated 2nd May 2013
  2. Copy my RTI request to CEPTAM dated 9th June 2013
  3. List of the name and phone numbers of some candidates

 

 

 

Drdo

RTI Act -2005 – Effective Tool to Tackle Corruption and Very Potent Weapon against Corruption and Nepotism

2 Comments

The main objectives of the RTI Act are – To promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority and

To set up a practical regime for giving citizens access to information that is under the control of public authorities.

RTI Act 2005 was introduced to make the government machinery transparent and enhanced the accountability for good governance.

Right to Information and has been given the status of a fundamental right under Article 19(1) of the Constitution. Article 19 (1) under which every citizen has freedom of speech and expression and have the right to know how the government works, what role does it play, what are its functions and so on.

The Act confers right to the citizens to know as to how the taxpayer’s money is being spent by the Government.

Right to Information Act empowers every citizen to seek any information, take notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records, and take certified samples of material.

DRDO although governed by Indian constitution and draw salary from central government funds.

But decisions are autonomous without accountability. They all are self style generals, they have own rules and rule implantations in own terms & conditions, but when succumbed to injury look for RM for protection and ask protection in the name of secrecy.

Like when an RTI revealed that induction of Grade Pay – Rs 4800 without approval of finance ministry now question of recovery of Rs 24 Cr is big crisis for DRDO, several court cases are facing by DRDO, almost 665 technical officers are busy to tackle the recovery issue.

DRDO management to hide their irresponsible act, making arrangements for reassessment for these technical officers. Please imagine the money involvement and man hour wastage.

The present Honorable Defence Minister has tried his level best and convinced DRDO officers/ employees to fall in the line and follow the constitutional provisions.

Honorable Defence Minister has take prompt action as per rule:-

  1. Not granted extension to Dr V K Sarswat
  2. Suspended Dr Arun Kumar, DOP two hours before his retirement day.
  3. Charge sheeted to Dr. S M Veerabhadrappa just after retirement.
  4. Node to enquiry for Dr W Selvamurthy, Ex CC R&D, Ph D in Yoga, Ms S Geetha, Ms Swati Srivastva, Mrs T Chandra banu, Scientist ‘F’
  5. Charge Sheeted Dr A K Tyagi, ex CPIO, DRDO Hqr
  6. Protected whistle blower Sh Prakash Singh, Senior Admin Officer-I

These well known decisions are in the right direction and has encourage the common people to identify incompetent, corrupt official , non performers etc of DRDO Labs across the India. So this cancer of corruption, nepotism, casteism can be treated in first stage.

DRDO has made it mockery of RTI Act – 2005. There are several examples in CIC decision; “ The Commission has taken a consistent view that notwithstanding the fact that DRDO is an exempted organization, this exemption applies only in respect of scientific/technical matters and not in respect of establishment matters.”

And best part is this that after CIC stands, DRDO went Honorable High Court for wasting precious poor tax payer’s money. Common man cannot digest who give power to these corrupt officers for saving their own skin they are using public money.

In case of DMSRDE, DRDO Lab Kanpur, some RTI were placed to expose the corrupt practices following in the Lab. As usual practice of RTI cell DRDO all were denied and after thoroughly and specifically made first appeal force to think first appellate authority for provide requested informations.

RTI cell DRDO intends to disclose informations. However, the RTI cell at Lab level put the sundry things under schedule-II exemptions. DRDO has protected its corrupt officials under exemption clause in the name of secrecy.

Please find enclosed copy of FAX addressed to Director, DMSRDE, KANPUR  Letter No RTI/02/2091 /F /2013/0139.0140,0141,0142,0144 dated 27th September 2013 signed by Sh Bishan Singh, Astt. Director, RTI Cell, For First Appellate Authority.

For your ready reference.

 

Regards                                                                                             Date – 14th October 2013

Prabhu Dandriyal
21-Sunderwala, Raipur
Dehradun-248008
E-mail – prabhudoon@gmail.com, website- www.corruptionindrdo.com
 
  1. Enclosed – Photocopy of FAX addressed to Director, DMSRDE, KANPUR  Letter No RTI/02/2091 /F /2013/0139.0140,0141,0142,0144 dated 27th September 2013
 rtidmsrdefaxcopy0001
To                                                                                                                                                  
The Defence Minister                                                                                                        
Room No -104, South Block                                                                                               
New Delhi – 110011
Drdo

Congrats Sh.AvinashChander for AGNI-5

2 Comments
To
Sh Avinash Chandra
SA to RM, Secretary DRDO, DG DRDO
DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg
New Delhi – 110105

 Congrats Sh.AvinashChander for AGNI-5

Heartiest congratulations to Sh.Avinash Chandra and all AGNI team members for the great success of AGNI-5 trials. It will boost the moral and reason to stay in DRDO to new upcoming young DRDO scientists.

Sh.Avinash Chandra is also keeping his promise to implement the Rama Rao Committee’s recommendations.

But major challenges are still waiting for your attentions like corruption and nepotism.  Both are big issues that require careful handling and also strongly like Honorable R.M. Sh. A K Antony gave example not to gave extension (License of Corruption) to Dr V K Saraswat.

The recent extensions to some senior incompetent scientists are example that Sh.Avinash Chandra is still in the grip of corrupt DRDO officials.

In Dr.Arun Kumar’s case Sh.Avinash Chandra was member of inquiry committee and gave clean chit to Dr.Arun Kumar and later on Sh. A K Antony corrected and suspended the culprit.

Sh.Avinash Chandra’s weaknesses are with corrupt DRDO officials gangs who are enriched and patronized by Dr. V K Sarswat and Dr. W Selvamurthy (PhD in Yoga).

Sh.Avinash Chandra ji leave your weakness, without fear declare the results of Scientist ‘H’, since you have taken responsibility to develop defence self reliance of our great nation. Leave the small weaknesses and weed out the corrupt gang of DRDO. A lot of honest and capable persons are available in DRDO.

Dr. Anil Kumar Tyagi’s case is also an example, why Dr. A K Singh helped him to get result via DoPT advice, have they shown you that this kind of practice done by DRDO before; you just allow them blindly to follow this route. You have been receiving hundreds of cases where humentrain / medical/ grievances request for transfer and other kind of help by DRDO scientist and staff. Can you tell me a single example of where these stalwarts took fast action?  I can send you a lot of examples where your HR/DOP dealings have been insensitive and the person has no choice but to bear it or leave the organization.

You can find their expertise and efficiency in protection of corrupt and incompetent DRDO officials like example case of Sh. R K Agarwal, who got promotion of scientist ‘H’ with false work claims and proudly publishes in DRDO news letter also, because he knows he managed his boss.

Sir, it is requested that you do the needful to save DRDO from the claws of these corrupt DRDO officials.

Please see the following:

Status of Complaint No: 569/11/9 against your one great scientist Dr Anil Kumar Tyagi, Sc ‘G’ CPIO, DRDO Hqrs

Date: 17/9/2013

Sent to CVO for Investigation/Action Taken Report on date :  16/3/2011

CVO Report Received on date:   18/7/2013

Prima facie material has been found against the officials involved. Regular Disciplinary action is recommended on: 9/9/2013 

Sir, now how can you give such important responsibility of CPIO, DRDO Hqrs to such individual?

Waiting for your quick response

Regards

Prabhu Dandriyal
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun-248008
Landline -0135-2787750, Mobile – 9411114879
Email – prabhudoon@gmail.com  Website – www.corruptionindrdo.com  
 
Date -20th September 2013

Copy to

  1. Defence Minister, Room No 104, South Block, New Delhi – 110011
  1. Dr. Syamal Kumar Sarkar, Secretary, MOP, Room No-112, North Block, New Delhi
Drdo

First Appeal – Development of Bullet Proof Jacket under GSQR-1293 by DMSRDE

1 Comment

FIRST APPEAL U/S 19(1) OF Right to Information Act, 2005

 To,
 Shri Surjan Pal, OS & Director DECS
First Appellate Authority, DRDO
RTI Cell, Room No. 240/B, DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg
New Delhi-110011

 Subject: First Appeal under Section 19(1) of RTI Act 2005

Reference: Letter No. DMS/0369/RTI/101/44/Letter_2013 dated 26 August 2013 issued by PIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur

Sir,

I am distressed by above referred decision of Public Information Officer, DMSRDE, Kanpur. I hereby submit this appeal u/s 19(1) of RTI Act 2005 for your kind consideration & decision.

1.    Details of appellant:-

Name
Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal
Address
21-Sunderwala, Raipur
Dehradun-248008
Mobile
09411114879
email ID
prabhudoon@gmail.com

2.    Details of Public Information Officer (PIO):-

Name &Rank
Shri Sarvesh Kumar , Scientist ‘F ‘
Address
DMSRDE, GT Road, Kanpur-208013

3. Particulars of Decision/Order of PIO against which appeal:-

Decision vide letter No. DMS/0369/RTI/101/44/Letter_2013 dated 26 August 2013. Copy enclosed as Enclosure -1.

4. Brief facts leading to appeal:-

(a)          An application under Section 6(1) of RTI Act 2005 dated 25 July 2013 was submitted to PIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur for providing information regarding Development of Bullet Proof Jacket (BPJ) – 1293. Copy of the RTI application dated 25 July 2013 is enclosed as Enclosure-2.

(b)          Public Information Officer, DMSRDE, Kanpur rejected the application u/s 24(1) of RTI Act 2005 vide letter No. DMS/0369/RTI/101/44/Letter_2013 dated 20 August 2013 although it was clearly mentioned as Note in RTI application that required information is directly related to the corruption and not come under Schedule-II.

(c)          PIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur rejected the RTI application dated 25 July 2013 on invalid, illegal, ultra vires & false reasons with mala-fide intentions to linger on the process of seeking information with an ulterior motive under direction of Director, DMSRDE, Kanpur (The Public Authority). This act of PIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur attracts action on PIO u/s 20 of RTI Act 2005.

(d)          Appellant is intensely upset by the decision of PIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur and this leads to appellant to file an appeal u/s 19(1) of RTI Act 2005.

5.    Reasons/Grounds for First Appeal:-

First Appeal is submitted to First Appellate Authority on following reasons/grounds.

(a)        Under the provisions of section 24(1)  of RTI Act 2005 the organisation notified under II Schedule of the Act are exempted from the information except when the information pertained allegations of corruption and human rights violations only.

(b)        Appellant submitted an application dated 25 July 2013 under section 6(1) of RTI Act 2005 to PIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur for   providing information as mentioned in application dated 25 July 2013 enclosed as Enclosure 2 to this FA.

(c)        Information was denied by PIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur on the ground that “DRDO is placed in Second Schedule of RTI Act, 2005 and is exempted from disclosure of Information under Section 24(1) except for information pertaining to the allegations of Corruptions and Human Rights Violations“.

(d)        The information sought by the appellant vide his application dated 25 July 2013 does not comes u/s 24(1) of the Act as per consistent views and decisions of Central Information Commission in various cases regarding organisation notified in Schedule II like DRDO.

(e)        Information was denied on false and illegal grounds with mala fide intentions to harass the appellant from getting the information.

(f)         PIO is not aware of recent views and decisions of CIC regarding DRDO(notified organisation under Schedule II), thereby he misused section 24(1) of the Act for denial of Information.

(g)        Appellant is deeply distressed by invalid decision of PIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur, hence the First Appeal u/s 19(1) of RTI Act 2005 before FAA.

6.    Prayer /relief sought for:-

Information sought vide RTI Application dated 25 July 2013 by appellant has been denied on false and invalid reasons by PIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur. Therefore, appellant kindly prays to FAA, DRDO to allow this appeal and issue instructions/orders to PIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur to provide the information sought as seek by appellant vide his RTI Application dated 25 July 2013.

7.    Grounds for prayer/relief sought for:-

1.      CIC decisions on notified organisations under Schedule II of RTI Act 2005 like DRDO

(i)        CIC in its various decisions consistently held that Establishment Matters relating to the organization notified u/s 24 of the RTI Act come within the purview of the Act and information in this regard thereto are not exempted from disclosure.

(ii)       CIC in its various decisions clarified that the exemption u/s 24(1) for DRDO (notified organisation under Schedule II) is only for Scientific/Technical/Strategic/national security information and not for the information of General nature/Estt. Matters/ Routine Correspondence/ all other information for which exemptions u/s 24(1) are not allowed.

(iii)      These decisions of CIC are binding on  all notified organisation under Schedule II (DRDO etc.), as these decisions of CIC has not been challenged till date in any court.

(iv)     In this regard following decisions of CIC are listed for your kind information and consideration.

  1. CIC/LS/A/2012/002612 dated 22.03.2013 (Dr. Neelam Bhalla Vs DRDO)
  2. CIC/LS/A/2009/001073 dated 17.2.2010 (Navin Praksh Gupta Vs DRDO)
  3. CIC/LS/A/2012/002487 dated 31.12.2012 ( Ms. Savitha Vs DRDO)
  4. CIC/LS/A/2010/000107 dated 26.4.2010 (Ms. K. Surya Kumari Vs DRDO)
  5. CIC/SM/C/2008/00054/LS dated 29.01.2010 (Shri Prabhat Vs DRDO)
  6. CIC/LS/A/2010/001277 dated 2.3.2010 (Ram Manohar Singh Vs. DRDO)
  7. CIC/LS/A/2012/002599 & CIC/LS/A/2012/002146 dated 01.11.2012 (Virender Kumar Vs DRDO)
  8. CIC/LS/C/2012/001204 dated 9.8.2012 (Rajiv Chauhan Vs DRDO)
  9. CIC/SM/A/2009/001014/LS dated 09.11.2009 (Navin Prakash Gupta Vs DRDO)
  10. CIC/LS/A/2009/001073 dated 17 Feb 2010 (Navin Prakash Gupta Vs DRDO)
  11. CIC/SM/C/2009/00794, CIC/LS/A/2010/00015, CIC/LS/C/2010/000076 dated 18 June 2010 (Navin Prakash Gupta Vs DRDO)

(v)      In these decisions CIC decided that “Immunity granted u/s 24(1) is only for scientific & strategic Information only“. All other information should be provided by all organisation notified under second schedule of the Act”.

2.      Subject/nature of information sought is already in public domain and not related to strategic/national security/scientific /technical matters

Various GSQRs, their detail specifications, cost of BPJ, requirement of Army for BPJ, Tenders for procurements of BPJ & their purchase details are already in public domain by means of Parliamentary Reports, Parliamentary Questions, Print & Electronic media, various reports from MOD etc. Hence information sought is not confidential / secret.

Besides these the information sought is not pertaining to strategic/national security/scientific/technical matters.

3.      Information sought is related to Estt. Matter/General Routine nature/ Purchase & procurement/Routine correspondence and permissible/allowed by CIC, even after the fact “DRDO is notified organisation under Schedule II”, in various decisions against DRDO.

4.      Information sought is also related to allegations of corruption as already mentioned in RTI application dated 25 July 2013 and having angle of vigilance as per CVC Act. Under the provisions of Section 24(1) of the Act, the information should be pertaining to allegations of corruption only. No evidences or proofs of corruption are required for seeking information related to corruption as per RTI Act 2005. Instead the onus is on PIO to establish that information sought is not having vigilance angle and not pertaining to allegation of corruption.

8.    Declaration:-

I hereby state that the information and particulars given above are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

 
 
Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal                                                                
21-Sunderwala, Raipur
Dehradun-248008
Landline -0135-2787750, Mobile – 9411114879
Email – prabhudoon@gmail.com
Website – www.corruptionindrdo.com   

 

Appeal No.:FA/PDD/DMSRDE/2013/03

Date: 07th September, 2013

 Enclosure: two 

(1)  Letter from PIO, DMSRDE dated 26 Aug 2013
(2)  RTI Application dated 25 July 2013
dmarde reply20003
 
To,                                                                                                                           25th July 2013
Shri Sarvesh Kumar,Scientist ‘F’
CPIO, DMSRDE, GT Road, Kanpur-208013

Hello,

This is with reference to Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence Report 2009-10 & 2010-11 and News published in print/electronic media   regarding Development of Bullet Proof Jacket (GSQR-1293) by DMSRDE, Kanpur. Kindly provide the following information under RTI Act 2005.

  1. The date on which GSQR-1293 for BPJ was issued by AHQ to DRDO.
  2. Provide the copy of the letter from AHQ to DRDO for development of BPJ as per GSQR-1293.
  3. Provide copy of DRDO HQ letter by which DMSRDE was instructed to develop BPJ as per GSQR-1293.
  4. The date on which DMSRDE started to work on development of BPJ as per GSQR-1293 and the date on which BPJ-1293 developed successfully.
  5. PDC given by AHQ for development of BPJ-1293.
  6. Whether any team was constituted for development of BPJ-1293? If yes then provide name of  the team members (Scientists, Technical Officers and Scientific Assistants etc) who worked on development of BPJ as per GSQR-1293.
  7. Whether any project has been sanctioned from the DRDO HQ for development of BPJ-1293?
  8. If yes then how much funds has been sanctioned for this Project?
  9. Provide the copy of sanction letter of the Project for development of BPJ as per GSQR-1293.
  10. If no Project was sanctioned from DRDO HQ for BPJ as per GSQR-1293 then from which head (Build-up etc) funds were arranged for Development and Fabrication of BPJ-1293?
  11. Provide total expenditure incurred in procurement of items(matrials) for development of BPJ-1293 including expenditure incurred on TA/DA to Officers & Employees, Government Transport and hired transport separately.
  12. Provide copies of DRDO.MM.06 (demand) and copies of supply orders for purchase of items/materials and services hired for development of BPJ-1293.
  13. Purchase of materials, items and services hired for fabrication of BPJ-1293 were made under which type of tendering process (Single Tender /Limited Tender/Open Tender/Global Tender)?
  14. Provide details of procurement of materials(items)/services hired/fabrication for BPJ-1293 in the

following format :-dmsrde table

  1. Total expenditure incurred in creating facility in DMSRDE, Kanpur for R&D of BPJ-1293.
  2. Total expenditure incurred from public fund for TA/DA in Temp. Duty of officers and staff involved in development of BPJ-1293 for visiting site of vendor involved in development/fabrication of BPJ-1293 or to other places for work related to BPJ-1293.
  3. Total expenditure incurred from public fund on Govt. Transport and hired transport for transporting the materials up to the site of SM Pulp Packaging Pvt Ltd at New Delhi/Palwal.
  4. Names of private vendors/firms involved in development/fabrication of BPJ-1293.
  5. Whether SM Pulp Packaging Pvt Ltd is registered with DMSRDE. If yes then provide copy of Registration Certificate issued by DMSRDE to S. M. Pulp Packaging Pvt Ltd.
  6. Whether any award was given to BPJ-1293 team/group or Scientist for successful development of BPJ-1293 under Laboratory Level Award under DRDO Award Scheme for 2010-2011. If so then provide the
  • Name of Scientists/Individual Scientist getting this award.
  • Amout of award in Rupees for Laboratory Scientist of the year award.
  • Copy of the minute sheet sanctioned by Director for this award.
    • Copy of the letter forwarded by Head of the Division with name(s) of Scientists to Technical Coordination.
    • Copy of the recommendation/proceeding of Award Committee constituted by Director for 2010-2011.

21.  Whether facilities for fabrication of BPJ are available in Kanpur (Yes/No).

22.  M/s M Kumar Udyog Pvt Ltd , Kanpur  is also working on development/fabrication of BPJ at Kanpur. Provide the reasons on the ground of which DMSRDE did not utilized services of M Kumar Udyog Pvt Ltd, Kanpur for development of BPJ-1293 using Limited Tendering Process in order to save expenditure on TA/DA of Officials and hired Transport?

23.  Copy of certificate issued by TBRL, Chandigarh for successful testing of BPJ developed by DMSRDE under GSQR-1293

24.  Whether these BPJ-1293 was under gone Quality Control/Assurance test by QAG, DMSRDE. If so then how many BPJ-1293 were tested by QAG, DMSRDE.

25.  Whether this BPJ-1293 was tested by another agency like CFSL Chandigarh etc? (Yes/No) If yes then provide the name of agency.

26.  How many BPJ-1293 was fabricated by SM Pulp Packaging Pvt Ltd and total amount paid to SM Pulp Packaging Pvt. Ltd for the fabrication of said BPJ-1293?

27.  Copy of the supply order placed for fabrication of mould/procurement of mould for BPJ-1293.

28.  Whether user trials were conducted by Army for BPJ-1293. (Yes/No) If yes then how many BPJ-1293 were submitted to AHQ for unit/field testing?

29.  AHQ (Army) accepted BPJ-1293 (Yes/No)

Enclosed-           Rs 10 Postal order 12F 470728

Regards,

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