Tag Archives: DG

Drdo

RTI – DRDO Hqrs – DRDE

6 Comments
To,                                                                                                                   28th   February 2014
Dr. RB Sharma, CPIO,
DRDO HQ, Min. of Defence,
DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg,
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 Vertox Laboratory Building DRDE, Gwalior. Sh Avinash Chander, SA to RM, DG, DRDO suppose to inaugurate this building on 20th Febraury 2014 as per Director, DRDE ION no DRDE/TC-29/Visit- Corres/2014 dated 17th February 2014. It is observed that Director, DRDE wasted poor tax payer’s money in the name of inauguration of one year old Vertox Laboratory Building because till date the tentage and sofa are lying for Sh Avinash Chander’s reception.

  1. Total Section amount of  Vertox Laboratory Building, DRDE, Gwalior
  2. The name of project for which Vertox Laboratory building was sectioned.
  3. The Vertox Laboratory building handing over date
  4. The Vertox Laboratory building completion date.
  5. Present Status of Vertox Laboratory building whether it is already start utilizing by DRDE then date of utilization
  6. Total amount spend in the name of inauguration arrangement by Director, DRDE
  7. The date and time of visit cancellation information send to Director, DRDE by SA office.

Note : Matter is directly related to corruption and not exempted under Section 24 (1). The money which DRDO officials are using is public money. The Tent management done by a Scientist F, Scientist D, Scientist C and a TO C.

Regards

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

 

Registration Number MODEF/R/2014/60404

Drdo

RTI – Regarding Appointment of SA to RM, DG, DRDO, Secretary, Defence R&D

8 Comments
To                                                                                   30th  January 2014
Sh. Subandhu Basu, CPIO,
US (SM-I),
Room no. 23,North Block,
New Delhi

Hello,

Shri Avinash Chander, DS & CCR&D (M&SS) was appointed as Secretary Department of Defence Research & Development-cum Director General, Defence Research & Development Organisation and Scientific Advisor to Raksha Mantri vide order No.12/9/2013-EO(SM.1) dated 31st May 2013 of DOPT. Dr. VK Saraswat was SA to RM, DGR&D, DRDO and Secretary (DR&D) from 01st September 2009 to 31st May 2013. Shri M. Natrajan was SA to RM, DGR&D, DRDO and Secretary (DR&D) from 31st August 2004 to 31st August 2009.

In reference to the above kindly provide the following information under RTI Act 2005.

INFORMATION SOUGHT

  1. Provide copy of Minute Sheet & File Noting of the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (ACC) approval for appointment of Shri Avinash Chander as Secretary Department of Defence Research & Development-cum Director General, Defence Research & Development Organisation and Scientific Advisor to Raksha Mantri with effect from 31st May 2013.
  2. Provide copy of Minute Sheet & File Noting of the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (ACC) approval for appointment of Dr. V.K. Saraswat as Secretary Department of Defence Research & Development-cum Director General, Defence Research & Development Organisation and Scientific Advisor to Raksha Mantri with effect from 01st September 2009.
  3. Provide copy of Minute Sheet & File Noting of the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (ACC) approval for appointment of Shri M. Natrajan as Secretary Department of Defence Research & Development-cum Director General, Defence Research & Development Organisation and Scientific Advisor to Raksha Mantri with effect from 31st August 2004.
  4. Criteria adopted for selection of SA to RM, DGR&D & Secretary (DR&D) in appointments of Shri M. Natrajan, Dr. VK Saraswat and Shri Avinash Chander. (Seniority or Personal achievements & Qualification or any other)
  5. Provide the copy of guidelines and rules for selection and appointment of the candidate as SA to RM, DGR&D & Secretary (DR&D) as per orders & procedures of Government of India
  6. The tenure and age for which DGR&D, DRDO, SA to RM and Secretary, DR&D could remain on this post.
  7. Reasons & Justification mentioned in appointment for giving three ranks/posts to a single person in DRDO by Government of India.
  8. Whether any person except SA to RM, DGR&D, DRDO and Secretary, DR&D) at top level/Secretary level under Govt of India has been assigned three ranks/posts simultaneously till so far. (Yes/No)
  9. If answer to point (8) is yes then provide the post/rank and name of the persons holding three posts simultaneously.

Regards

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

Registration Number            DOP&T/R/2014/60398 

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

Anarchy in DRDO Labs

Leave a comment

The corrupt practices of DRDO Directors have made them blind to the extents that do not respect the chain of command. Do not respect their seniors who helped them to shoulder the responsibility.

Unnecessary infighting within labs has caused lack of motivation towards self reliance.

Directors, to satisfy their ego, searches some know buried facts against an individual’s officials who were the trusted men (Chamchas) of his predecessor.

Honorable Defence Minister is requested to make specific mention in his forth coming address to DRDO Directors Conclave “Directors of 52 Labs should concentrate their energy to delvers at least 52 Import Substitutes only” rather than indulge sundry ego problems, which resulted in form of increasing legal litigations.

Director, DRDE, Gwalior Sh M P Kaushik being put the lab knew that his predecessor in year 2010 permitted the inclusion of BE degree in service book record of Sh B P Shakya, STA’B’.

Since the Sh B P Shakya, STA’B belongs to Schedule Cast category and trusted man of  Sh M P Kaushik’s predecessor overlooked the DO Part order 22 dated 10th March 2010 and served  charge sheet to Sh B P Shakya, STA’B.

It is requested to S A to RM Sh Avinash Chandra as competent authority please quashed the charge sheet dated 16th October 2013 issued by Sh M P Kaushik and give directive to Sh M P Kaushik to concentrate his energy in DRDE & DRDE development work instead of wasting the precious time and energy in his cheap ego satisfaction.

Sir there is more 100 of similar cases known to me where individuals concealed their higher qualification while time of their joining. In DRDE you will find five cases in similar nature.  Have DRDO ready to open all cases?

It is again requested please give directions to your all directors to stop harassing the Schedule Cast and weaker section of society.

In above it is also observed that the CAO, DRDE also not gave his co-operation and guidance to individual to get natural justice. As a senior administrative official and moral ground he should advice to Sh M P Kaushik not to take such vindictive approach.

Similar case of harassment of Schedule Cast category has been observed in DEAL, DRDO, Dehradun. Where sh R C Agarwal, Director, DEAL, instead of delivering the product casting 100 Cr (SDR) for which DRDO has extended his service twice (unprecedentedly ) has diverted his attention to torture Schedule Cast individual Sh Jagdish Kumar T O ‘C’, who has been thrice to Antarctica and best communication man of DEAl.

Sh R C Agarwal failed in every field of his technical contribution, feels that helping his own community by out of way, in promotion, protecting them in their action of harassing Schedule Cast and weaker section.

Sh R C Agarwal in his second extension in service as Director, DEAL, he was busy with

Increased hatred against Schedule Cast and weaker section.

Out of way helping own community

Increased works (civil construction and infrastructure) activity in many folds

Sh R C Agarwal support Sh R K Agarwal for his false claim of his involvement in Project ‘NARAD’ and got success to supersede more than 50 odd DRDO senior scientist

Sh R C Agarwal accepted and recommended Sh R K Agarwal’s false claim ““his main contribution has been the development of NARAD, the first semi-static and transportable terminals developed in the country. These terminals were immediately deployed in SRI LANKA during operation PAWAN where they have played a vital Role.”

By this Sh R C Agarwal has abused his power and authority and has mislead with false information to honorable Raksha Mantri and selecting committee empower to select Sceitist ‘H’ equivalent to Lt general.

Sh R K Agarwal created hatred with SC community and Sh R C Agarwal seconded his misadventure. A committee constituted by DG, Sh SS Sundaram to look in to  the matter,   but unfortunately committee again plan to humiliate Sh Jagdish Kumar T O ‘C’, by sending a Fax dated 6th January 2014 vide No.78700/TIS to ask him to prepare a power point presentation on work claimed in APAR against the norms of ASCODAR.

Honorable Raksha Mantri is requested to set up a inquiry so that Schedule Cast and weaker section of DRDO should not suffer.

Drdo

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Subject: “Offer for High Temp. Reaction Unit”

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

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

(ii)   IPID0022 (enclosed)

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

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

Subject : “LAB REACTOR”

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

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

(ii)               DMSRDE_Techno-Commercial_50lit_High_Temp_Reactor-Price_Bid (enclosed)

(iii)             DMSRDE_Techno-Commercial_Reaction_Overhead_assembly-Technical_Bid (enclosed)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Annexure – 7

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

‘Strategic nature of work doesn’t give DRDO special powers’

3 Comments

Last Updated: Wednesday, December 05, 2012, 17:43 ZEENEWS.COM

New Delhi: DRDO is a subordinate organisation under Defence Ministry and does not enjoy any special power or autonomy because of its strategic nature of work, Defence Minister A K Antony told the Rajya Sabha on Wednesday.

In a written reply to question whether DRDO enjoys a huge amount of autonomy because of its strategic nature of work, he said, “DRDO is a subordinate organisation under the Department of Defence R&D in Defence Ministry and is governed by central government rules and regulations.

“Therefore, DRDO as an organisation does not enjoy any special powers or autonomy because of its strategic nature of work.”

Revised delegation of financial powers of DG of DRDO was carried out in 2010 to address a long standing requirement and was done after due process and deliberation, he said.

“The process of exercise of these powers has been further rationalised and a corrigendum has been issued by Department of Defence (R&D) on November 21, 2012 as a partial modification to the earlier financial powers,” Antony said.
In reply to a question on resignation of scientists from DRDO, he said, “A total of 637 scientists have resigned during 2007-2011 and 50 scientists up to October 31, 2012… Scientists who had resigned have indicated their personal or domestic grounds as the reasons for leaving DRDO.”

However, it is assumed that increased opportunities or incentives available in other organisations and industries are the main reason of such resignation, he added.

On incentives taken as corrective measures to restrict resignation of scientists from DRDO, he said excellent infrastructure facilities have been created at work places and residential complexes and two additional increments have been given on promotion to each grade.

Replying to a query on ‘One Rank One Pension’ for the ex-servicemen, Minister of State for Defence Jitendra Singh said, “Substantial improvements have been made in the pensions of the Armed Forces personnel after 2006. However, improvement of pensionary benefits is an ongoing process.”

He also said that the recommendations of a government committee, headed by Cabinet Secretary, have been accepted by the government and are in the process of implementation.

PTI

Drdo

CAG pulls up DRDO for irregularities in new projects

Leave a comment

Agencies : New Delhi, Thu Nov 29 2012, 20:41 hrs The Indian Express

The CAG has pulled up the DRDO pointing out “deficiencies” and “procedural irregularities” committed by it in taking up new projects and splitting sanctions for them to bring it within financial powers of the organisation head.

“Scrutiny of project sanctions issued by DRDO revealed procedural irregularities relating to misleading nomenclature of sanction issuing authorities, absence of data base of sanctions and splitting of sanctions,” the CAG said in its report tabled in the Parliament today.

“The above audit findings underscore that the efforts of the Ministry of Defence to bring in transparency and objectivity in functioning of its departments remain unachieved as of now,” the report said.

The CAG noted that financial powers of Director General, DRDO and Secretary, Defence Research and Development were enhanced to the range of Rs 25 crore to 50 crore and Rs 60 crore to 75 crore respectively and both these offices are held by one person only.

“Audit of sanctions revealed non-adherence with established norms and procedures for issue, circulation and recording of sanctions authorising expenditure out of public funds for various purposes,” the report said.

On the splitting of sanctions, the Government auditor said, “We observed that after the enhanced delegation of financial powers in July 2010, sanctions were spilt up to bring them within the delegated financial powers of the DG R and D (DRDO Chief) that is up to Rs 50 crore in consultation with the Integrated Financial Advisor.

” “DRDO splitting such sanctions is tantamount to selecting financial advisor which clearly erodes the integrity and independence of financial scrutiny of expenditure proposals,” the report said.

The CAG noted that in some cases, the cost of DRDO projects was brought down below Rs 50 crore by reducing the number of deliverables and curtailing its scope enabling the DG, DRDO to issue the sanction within his delegated powers.

“Clearly projects were being split up to keep the sanction below Rs 50 crore,” it said.

The report said, “instead of obtaining the revised sanction for existing projects by approaching the competent financial authority at the next higher level, fresh projects were sanctioned.”

The project cases cited by the CAG included the Project Akashdeep of DRDO for developing indigenous Aerostat radars and Project ADITYA for the vehicles mounted high power laser directed energy weapons.

The report said the enhancement of delegated financial powers has resulted in concentration of financial powers with the DRDO headquarters which has a “tendency to split projects to avoid reference to higher CFAs.

” The CAG also noted that the DRDO “did not maintain a control register of sanctions issued and there excited no mechanism to track the number and total amount of sanctions issued for projects.”

“In absence of minimum control records, the possibility of sanctions being issued in excess of funds, splitting of sanctions, issue of multiple projects for the same objective could neither be ruled out nor noticed in normal course,” the report observed.

In the recent past, an internal audit report of the Defence Ministry had made similar observations there which were refuted by the DRDO saying they were only preliminary in nature.

 

Drdo

Defence audit raises questions about scientific adviser’s grants

3 Comments

The CGDA has pointed out several infirmities in the grants sanctioned by V.K. Saraswat.

ABHINANDAN MISHRA NEW DELHI | 6th Oct 2012 – The Sunday Gaurdian

he Comptroller General of Defence Audit (CGDA) has raised questions about certain research grants and aids given by the Defence Minister’s Scientific Adviser, V.K. Saraswat, to undeserving societies headed by scientists. These questions have been raised during an audit of the Defence Research Development Organisation (DRDO), ordered by the Ministry of Defence. The projects are all part of the DRDO.

According to the report, Saraswat, the scientific adviser, sanctioned a grant of Rs 288 lakh to Professor V.U. Reddy of C.R. Rao Advanced Institute of Mathematics, Statistics and Computer Science (AIMSCS), Hyderabad for a project on a futuristic radar.

The CGDA has pointed out several infirmities in this sanction. Since Saraswat is the president of the society’s governing body, it was wrong on his part to sanction any grants to the society. More importantly, the society is known for its achievements in mathematics, statistics and computer science and “is not even generally connected with research relating to futuristic radars”. The society also does not have the necessary equipment to carry out such research and did not have the expert manpower when it was given the grant.

The DRDO sanctioned another grant-in-aid project costing Rs 298.17 lakh to another scientist from the same society, S.B. Ra, who is a co-principal investigator for the above project. The CGDA has questioned the sanctioning of large grants-in-aid to institutes that do not have the required number of researchers or even basic facilities like computers.

The audit has also questioned the way various DRDO chairs are being given to ex-DRDO employees. S.K. Salwan, an ex-laboratory director, was appointed to the Dr B.D. Nag Chaudhari DRDO chair for three years at a cost of Rs 83.064 lakh. Kota Harinarayana, former director of Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), a DRDO sponsored society, was awarded the Dr D.S. Kothari-DRDO chair for three years at a cost of Rs 83.064 lakh.

As per the audit, no public notice was issued seeking applications for these highly paid positions. The appointment was made by DG, DRDO in a discretionary manner on the basis of nomination. Further, instead of paying a monthly remuneration, the DRDO released a sum of Rs 27.688 lakh each to both of them without deducting tax at source.

The grant to S.K. Salwan was released even before he joined the Dr B.D. Nag Chaudhari DRDO chair. The audit has recommended appropriate recoveries. It has further questioned the rationale behind leaving the ownership of intellectual property rights generated by research performed under this grant with the experts and not with the government.