Tag Archives: Departments

PIL- Grounds

GROUNDS

  1. BECAUSE, Shri Avinash Chander , DS was granted extension for two terms, 60 years to 62 years (01 Dec 2010 -30 Nov 2012) and 62 to 64 years(01 Dec 2012 to 30 Nov 2014). Extension in the service beyond the age of superannuation covered under the 2nd and 3rd proviso of FR 56(d) and various OMs issued by DOPT. The procedure for grant of extension to the Scientists is laid down in DOPT DO letter No. 28/19/2000-EO(SM-II) dated the 10th July, 2000, OM No.  26012/6/2002-Estt. (A) dated 9th December 2002, OM No. 26012/8/2011-Estt. (A) dated 16 May 2011, OM No. 26012/12/2013-Estt.(A) dated 13 June, 2013 and OM No. 26012/7/2013-Estt.(A.IV) dated 26 Jun 2013.
  2. BECAUSE, the second extension in service beyond the age of 62 years of Sri Avinash Chander was wholly illegal as it does not fulfil the provisions and conditions of FR 56(d) and various OMs of DOPT mentioned above. The first condition that was violated is “International Stature” of the Scientist. The second condition that was violated is “whether this extension will block promotion opportunities of others in the Department”. (Please refer to Para 3 DOPT OM No. 26012/8/2011-Estt. (A) dated 16 May 2011)
  3. Because, Shri Avinash Chander is not having International Stature in field of Science & Technology and therefore ACC should not rant him extension beyond age of 62 years after superannuation upto 64 years under the gross violation of the third proviso to FR 56(d).
  4. Because, the number of posts of Distinguished Scientists are fixed by Government under the provisions of DRDS Rules 1979 and it was 8-10 as in year 2012 when extension in service beyond 62 year to 64 year age was granted Sri Avinash Chander. All the Distinguished Scientists in the year 2012 were on extension so it blocked promotion opportunities of other senior scientists in the department as until they will not retire the Outstanding Scientists below the age of 60 years could not get promotion as vacancy of Distinguished Scientists have been fixed by the Government.
  5. Because, the extension in service beyond the age of 62 years to Shri Avinash Chander was illegal, therefore his appointment to the post of Secretary, DRD is wholly illegal and unjustified.
  6. Because, pay scale of Distinguished Scientist is Rs 75,500-80,000/- (HAG+ Scale) and pay scale of Secretary, DRD is Rs 80,000 (fixed).Therefore appointment from Distinguished Scientist to Secretary is promotion cum appointment as pay scales have been changed. No Government servant who is on extension of service after the prescribed date of retirement should be promoted to another post during the period of extension of service.(Please refer DOPT Handbook- Age of Retirement/Extension)
  7. Because, the appointment of Sri Avinash Chander as Secretary, DRD was at the time when he was on extension in service 62-64 years so technically it was promotion cum appointment. Since no Government servant who is on extension of service after the prescribed date of retirement should be promoted to another post during the period of extension of service, hence appointment of Sri Avinash Chander as Secretary, DRD is illegal.
  8. Because, in reply to Unstarred Question NO-2871 put by Sri E.M. Sudarsana Natchiappan, MP in Rajya Sabha on 06.09.2012 on Appointment of Secretaries on contract basis, it was informed by Hon’ble Shri V. Narayanasamy, Minister of State in the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions and Minister of State in the Prime Minister’s Office that “there is no policy formulation for appointing the Secretaries in Union Ministries and Departments on contract”.
  9. Because, The Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), in its reply to Lok Sabha MP Asaduddin Owaisi, has stated that “Government servants are allowed to continue in service after 60 years in rare and exceptional cases.” It is relevant to mention here that the news was published on 28 May 2012 in Hindustan Times stating “Contractual appointment post-retirement not in rules” based on reply given by DOPT, Ministry of Personnel in 15th Lok Sabha.
  10. Because, there were several young and more qualified Scientist than Sri Avinash Chander in the list for consideration before ACC but they were ignored by ACC. The appointment of Shri Avinash Chander who was having just 1.5 year in his retirement even after second extension in service is wholly unjustified.
  11. Because, orders for regular appointment and contractual appointment could not be clubbed in one order as both are totally distinct action as per recruitment rules. DOPT should initiate the case of contractual appointment separately when Shri Avinash Chander being at verge of his retirement and Government should feel his requirement in absence of suitable leadership in the existing Scientists in the department.
  12. Because, an official appointed on contract after retirement cannot function as Head of Office for all administrative & financial matters in the department. Since it is apparent from his appointment letter that he will exercise all administrative and financial powers on contractual appointment as he was having in his regular appointment before retirement.
  13. Because, presently there are more than a dozen Distinguished Scientists in DRDO from various disciplines like Missiles, Aeronautics, Combat Vehicle, Armament and Electronics & Computer Science. DRDO is having seven Director General and six Chief Controller R&D in HAG+ Scale, hence there was no need and necessity  to appoint Shri Avinash Chander on contract in advance prior to 1.5 year of his retirement on 31 May 2013 by ACC.
  14. Because, decision of ACC to give appointment on contract to Shri Avinash Chander on 31 May 2013, i.e. 1.5 years prior to his retirement shows malafide intentions as on 31 May 2013, how can ACC decide that there will be no alternate to Shri Avinash Chander who can hold the position of Secretary, DRD, DGR&D and SA to RM after his retirement on 30 November 2014. While holding the position of Secretary, DRD, DGR&D and SA to RM, he was purely involved in Administrative work as he was not associated directly with any project/programme of DRDO. In present organisation structure of DRDO all seven Technological clusters are headed by seven Director Generals who are eminent Distinguished Scientists and  experts of their S&T discipline.
  15. Because, the appointment is politically motivated, made with non-application of mind hence malicious and liable to be quashed.
  16. Because, more qualified, having more technical contribution credential and young scientist having enough long tenure was in list but they were ignored by ACC.
  17. Because, Government has not laid down any criteria for selection and appointment of Secretary, DRD till now in past several years and making appointment in arbitrary manner. Transparency is not being maintained in appointment of Sri Avinash Chander as Secretary, DRD and decision was taken by ACC in arbitrary manner.
  18. Because, DRDO is having annual budget of Rs. 15283 crore and more than 30000 official working in the organisation then a person appointed on contract should not exercise the administrative and financial powers.
  19. Because, true and proper facts about integrity of Sri Avinash Chander was not submitted by department to ACC hence the decision to appoint him as Secretary, DRD was not just & proper.
  20. Because, performance of Sri Avinash Chander being Secretary, DRD from 31 May 2013 to 30 Nov 2014 should be re-assessed and should be considered by new ACC (after formation of new Government) keeping in view his integrity in administrative and financial matters at the time  of giving contractual appointment to him after his retirement on 30 November 2014. Hence issuing order for appointment on contract in advance on 31 May 2013 is wholly illegal & unjustified.
  21. Because, there are half a dozen complaints on malpractices and corruption against Shri Avinash Chander are pending before Government. Therefore it was no appropriate to appoint him on contract without disposal of complaints and vigilance clearance.
  22. Because, there is no the provision for appointment on contract of any scientist in HAG+ Scale s of DRDS Rules 1979 (R&P Rules of DRDO Scientists) , hence appointment on contract of Shri Avinash Chander  is illegal.
  23. Because, under the provisions of  DOPT OMs No. AB.14017/34/2008-Estt. (RR) (Pt.) dated 17th June, 2013 and AB.14017/34/2008-Estt. (RR) (Pt.) dated 16th June, 2014 regarding need for contract appointment in the Ministry/Department, there is no provision for contract appointment in SAG/HAG Scale . These two OMs of DOPT clarified that till date Government has not finalised the policy/rules for appointment on contract in SAG/HAG scale. Hence post-retirement appointment on contract of Shri Avinash Chander  as Secretary, DRD cum DGR&D and SA to RM is totally illegal.

PRAYER

It is, therefore, most respect fully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may Graciously be pleased to:-

  1. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS commanding/directing the Respondent No. 1 & 2 to cancel the appointment on contract after retirement of Shri Avinash Chander as Secretary, DRD cum DGR&D and SA to RM.
  2. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS commanding  to  direct the Respondent No. 1 for investigation/probe in all the complaints cases of malpractices and corruption against Shri Avinash Chander by petitioner and other complainants.
  3. Issue interim orders to respondent no. 1 to keep away Shri Avinash Chander from working as Secretary, DRD, DGR&D and SA to RM till the finalization of this PIL.
  4. issue such other writ, order or directions as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case; AND

to award cost of the PIL to the Petitioner.

 

(…………………..)

    Advocate

Date:

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT DELHI

*****

ANNEXURE NO. -A1

 

IN

 

CIVIL MISC. WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO.                 OF 2014

(Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India)

(DISTRICT: DELHI)

Prabhu Dandriyal son of Late Shri  R N Dandriyal

Resident of 21, Sunderwala, Raipur Road, Dehradun-248008

…Petitioner

Versus

  1. Union of India through the Cabinet Secretary, Government of India, Cabinet Secretariat, Rashtrapati Bhavan, New Delhi-110011.
  2. Secretary, Min. of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions, Government of India, North Block , New Delhi-110011.
  3. Secretary, Ministry of Defence, South Block, New Delhi-110011.
  4. Shri Bhanu Pratap Sharma, Special Secretary and Establishment Officer, DOPT, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions, Government of India, North Block , New Delhi-110011.

…Respondents

RTI- PMO – Service Extensions

To                                                                      Date – 27th October 2014
Shri Syed Ekram Rizwi,
Director & Central Public Information Officer,
Prime Minister’s Office,
South Block,
New Delhi – 110011

 

Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in respect of OFFICE MEMORANDUM  F.No.22/35/2011-EO (SM.II) 24th September, 2014 Sub: Grant of extension/re-employment to Central Government servants beyond the age of superannuation.  In Para 1 – The ACC has observed that in some of the cases, the Departments are not taking timely action to reconstitute the Departmental Peer Review Committee (DPRC) and are unilaterally extending the service of the officers beyond the age of superannuation without first obtaining approval of the ACC.

  1. Please provide the copy of order issued by PMO for cases of services extensions which found without obtaining approval of ACC.
  2. Please provide the names of individuals with name of respective department who were given extensions without obtaining approval of ACC.
  3. Please provide  the names of  individuals who were retired from service as per Para- 4 of above referred OM – that in absence of specific approval of ACC towards extension of his services beyond the date of superannuation, an officer should stand retired on his date of superannuation.
  4. As per Para- 1 of above referred OM  – (The ACC has observed that in some of the cases, the Departments are not taking timely action to reconstitute the Departmental Peer Review Committee (DPRC) and are unilaterally extending the service of the officers beyond the age of superannuation without first obtaining approval of the ACC.) As per above statement it is  understood that ACC found such cases where individuals were given service extension without getting first obtaining approval of the ACC. Provide the action taken by PMO on these illegal service extensions till date.

Regards

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

Enclosed – OFFICE MEMORANDUM  F.No.22/35/2011-EO (SM.II) 24th September, 2014

Registration Number            PMOIN/R/2014/61451

OFFICE MEMORANDUM  F.No.22/35/2011-EO (SM.II) 24th September, 2014

F.No.22/35/2011-EO (SM.II)
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions
Department of Personnel & Training
(Office of the Establishment Officer)
 
North Block, New Delhi
24th September, 2014

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Sub: Grant of extension/re-employment to Central Government servants beyond the age of superannuation

Attention of all the Ministries/Departments is invited to the Government of India (Transaction of Business) Rules which prescribe that the ACC is the competent authority to decide the cases of extension in service beyond the age of superannuation. Attention is also invited to DoPT’s OM. No. 26012/6/2002-Estt, (A) dated 09.12.2002 on the subject mentioned above laying down instructions/criteria for grant of extension in service to the categories of personnel referred in proviso to F.R. 56(d). The ACC has observed that in some of the cases, the Departments are not taking timely action to reconstitute the Departmental Peer Review Committee (DPRC) and are unilaterally extending the service of the officers beyond the age of superannuation without first obtaining approval of the ACC.

2. It has also been observed that Ministries/Departments often submit proposals late to the EO Division as a result of which submission of cases for consideration of the ACC also gets delayed.

3. In view of the above, all the Scientific Ministries/Departments are hereby advised to take timely action for constitution of the DPRC for considering the cases for extension of service of specialists in medical or scientific fields, beyond the normal date of superannuation and ensure that proposals seeking approval of the ACC be invariably submitted at least two months in advance of the date of superannuation.

4. It is also reiterated that in absence of specific approval of ACC towards extension of his services beyond the date of superannuation, an officer should stand retired on his date of superannuation and under no circumstances should the Ministry/Department concerned extend his services beyond superannuation unilaterally without the approval & ACC.

sd/-

(Anand Madhukar)

Director (ACC)

 

Implementation of IPR Information System in DRDO – is it exempted organisation for all GOI orders ?

To                                                                                                          28th July 2014
Hon’ble
Shri Narendra Modi
Prime Minister
Room No. 152, PMO
South Block,
New Delhi-110011

Subject

  1. Non-Implementation of DOPT, Govt. of India, Office Memorandums regarding submission of IPR and put the same in Public Domain in Defence Research & Development Organisation, Min. of Defence
  2. Implementation of IPR Information System in DRDO

Hon’ble Sir,

Good Governance is core issue for Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). One aspect of Good Governanceis defined as “Our model of good governance ensures that even the tallest leaders and top bureaucrats are answerable to an ordinary citizen, hailing from any part of India. The Government believes in operating in complete transparency, with every file andofficial record open for public scrutiny, except when these may endanger national security” on BJP website

Main characteristics of Good Governance are Transparency, Accountability and Zero tolerance for Corruption-Eradication of Corruption and Rule of Law.

Sir, I would like to quote your message “Lack of good governance is like diabetes which affects each and every part of the body” and “We did not get surajya (good governance) after swaraj (independence)”.

In ceremony of release of BJP Manifesto you told “DO MOOL BATON KO LEKAR HUM AAGE BADH RAHE HAIN”- First is Good Governance and second is Development.

Sir, very humbly I would quote the News – On June 4, as Prime Minister Narendra Modi met all his 77 secretaries at his 7, Race Course Road residence with a call forsuggestions. “Tell me how to run my Government“.

As a matter of fact, you might agree that Government Servants are backbone of Government System and without support of them Government can’t function, as evident form your statement to secretaries of Government of India.

Sir, It is general perception today that “Corruption is a Termite for India”. Corruption is the abuse of entrusted power for private gain. Corruption whether in cash or kind lead generation to black money? The major source of investment of black money is immovable property as lack of implementation of transparency system in records of immovable property, it is very difficult to search & assess the value of immovable property whether declared or non-declared by an individual.

Government Employees are bound by two statutory rules, one for conduct (CCS (Conduct) Rules 1964) and other for discipline (CCS (CCA) Rules 1965).

Government felt that all Government Officers (Group ‘A’) should declare their IPR regularly every year under the provisions of Rule 18(1) (ii) of CCS (Conduct) Rules 1964.  Therefore, DOPT, Government of India issued various Office Memorandums to all Ministries/Departments/Organisations under Central Government regarding submission of IPR and place the same in Public Domain. These OMs are as follows:

i.    N0.11013/3/2011-Estt.A dated 11th April 2011

ii.    NO. 11013/3/2011-Estt. (A) dated 23 May 2011

iii.    F.No. 11013/3i2011-Estt. (A) dated 8th June 2011

iv.    F.No. 110131312011-Estt.(A) dated 23rd September 2013

In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 59 of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, the Government of India has notified the rules to provide for furnishing of information and annual return containing declaration of assets and liabilities by public servants as on 31st day of March every year, to the competent authority. Copy of the DO Letter D.O. No. 5(1)/2014 – EO (PR) dated 25th July 2014 issued by DOPT is annexed.

DOPT implemented these OMs fully for IAS and other cadres directly under it and put IPR of all officers in prescribed form for IPR issued by DOPT. Software known as IAS Officer’s IPR Information System also uploaded on DOPT website by which every citizen can get the latest signed and duly filled copy IPR 2013 in prescribed Performa issued by DOPT. Recently DOPT is going to upload its latest developed software “Property Related Information System (PRISM)” by 01.08 2014 for online uploading of assets and liabilities.

DOPT issued a prescribed format for declaration of Immovable Property by Government Officers. Copy of the IPR form is annexed. Most of the Ministries/Departments/Organisations under Central Government implemented the OMs of DOPT regarding placing of IPR in public domain by updating every year and recent IPR 2013 is available on websites of these Ministries/Departments/Organisations.

Sir, recently you also asked your ministers to submit property details to by July-end despite they have already declared their assets to Election Commission in the recent elections in 2014.This shows your commitment towards Transparency and Anti-Corruption in Government of India.

Despite all facts narrated above, there is one organisation under Ministry of Defence that has assumed that it is exempted from rules framed by DOPT, Government of India.This organisation is Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO).

This organisation is having a budget of approx. Rs. 11500 crore in Finance Bill 2014-15 out of which DRDO is spending 48-50% in procurement. So about Rs.5500 crore is being expenditure in procurements. The major source of corruption is procurement and best source for investment of back money is immovable property at manipulated cost.

Transparency and corruption are correlated like light and darkness. Simply where transparency is maintained there will be no corruption and where no transparency in the system then definitely corruption exists there. DRDO chief do not believe in transparency and rule of law the two main features of Good Governance. It can be simply established by non-placing IPR 2013 of 7500 Scientists of DRDO including Shri Avinash Chander and 11 Director General & Chief Controllers.

On perusal of DRDO website, I found surprising facts which stunned me and forced me to write irresponsible fact of DRDO to Hon’ble Prime Minister Sir. Since 2011 the IPRs of all DRDO Scientist including Shri Avinash Chander has not been updated. DRDO is grossly violating the DOPT; Government of India OMs regarding placing of every year updated IPR in public domain. Besides this DRDO is not using the prescribed Form of IPR specified by DOPT and not placed copies of these IPR 2013 duly signed by individuals on its website?

Sri Avinash Chander chief of DRDO is holding the three posts under Government of India viz DGR&D, Scientific Advisor to Raksha Mantri and Secretary, Defence R&D. Why he is not maintaining transparency and Rule of law in IPR matter in DRDO? The answer is quite understandable in light of above narrated facts. Besides Sri Avinash Chander, Dr. A.K. Singh, Director, Directorate of Personnel (DOP) is fully responsible for such kind of wilful and gross negligence in non-implementation of Government of India orders regarding placing of IPR 2013 in public domain in prescribed Performa.

Sir, for your kind perusal following documents is annexed as follows:

i.        IPR Form issued by DOPT.

ii.        Snaps of IAS IPR Information System.

iii.        IPR details of Sri Avinash Chander, Secretary, DR&Dand SA to RM, Dr. V. Bhujanaga Rao, DG (NS&M) and Dr. A.K. Singh, Director, DOP of 2011 in tabular form available on DRDO website. (Not in DOPT IPR Form)

Sir, non-transparency indicates corruption in the organisation. So I humbly request you to take stern action against the officers in DRDO responsible for such kind of gross violation of Government of India orders & policies for Good Governance and give directive to Sri Avinash Chander, DGR&D and Scientific Advisor to Raksha Mantri, Secretary, DRD for managing to upload the IPR 2013 of all 7500 Scientists of DRDO and implementation of IPR Information System of DOPT in DRDO.

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

Copy to:

  1. Hon’ble Defence Minister, Ministry of Defnce, South Block, New Delhi
  2. Hon’ble Minister of State, Min. of Personnel, PG & Pensions, North Block, New Delhi.
LIST OF ANNEXURES
i.    N0.11013/3/2011-Estt.A dated 11th April 2011
ii.    NO. 11013/3/2011-Estt. (A) dated 23 May 2011
iii.    F.No. 11013/3i2011-Estt. (A) dated 8th June 2011
iv.    F.No. 110131312011-Estt.(A) dated 23rd September 2013
v.    DO Letter D.O. No. 5(1)/2014 – EO (PR) dated 25th July 2014 of DOPT
vi.    IPR Form issued by DOPT.
vii.    Snaps of IAS IPR Information System
viii.    IPR 2011 of Sri Avinash Chander, Secretary, DRD& DGR&D, DRDO
ix.    IPR-2011 of Dr. V. BhujanagaRao, DG(NS&M), DRDO
x.    IPR-2011 of Dr. A.K. Singh, Director, DOP, DRDO
xi.    Budget of DRDO 2014-2015
DOPT-OM-N0.11013.-3-.2011-Estt.A-dated-11th-April-2011
DOPT-OM-N0.11013.-3-.2011-Estt.A-dated-11th-April-2011
DOPT OM NO. 11013/3/2011-Estt. (A) dated 23 May 2011
DOPT OM NO. 11013/3/2011-Estt. (A) dated 23 May 2011
DOPT F.No. 11013/3i2011-Estt. (A) dated 8th June 2011
DOPT F.No. 11013/3i2011-Estt. (A) dated 8th June 2011
DOPT F.No. 110131312011-Estt.(A) dated 23rd September 2013
DOPT F.No. 110131312011-Estt.(A) dated 23rd September 2013
DO Letter D.O. No. 5(1)/2014 - EO (PR) dated 25th July 2014 of DOPT
DO Letter D.O. No. 5(1)/2014 – EO (PR) dated 25th July 2014 of DOPT
 IPR Form issued by DOPT
IPR Form issued by DOPT
 Snaps of IAS IPR Information System
Snaps of IAS IPR Information System
 IPR 2011 of Sri Avinash Chander, Secretary, DRD& DGR&D, DRDO
IPR 2011 of Sri Avinash Chander, Secretary, DRD& DGR&D, DRDO
 IPR-2011 of Dr. V. Bhujanaga Rao, DG(NS&M), DRDO
IPR-2011 of Dr. V. Bhujanaga Rao, DG(NS&M), DRDO
 IPR-2011 of Dr. A.K. Singh, Director, DOP, DRDO
IPR-2011 of Dr. A.K. Singh, Director, DOP, DRDO
Budget of DRDO 2014-2015
Budget of DRDO 2014-2015