Tag Archives: DHRD

Drdo

Submission of the facts of deliberate Acts and omissions of illegality, criminal offences under IPC 1860, misconducts under CCS Conduct Rules, 1964 and criminal misconducts under prevention of corruption Act 1988 committed in 2005 for conducting discreet independent enquiry and for registration of FIR against the prima facie guilty officers of AFHQ Cadre of the O/o JS (T) & CAO, MoD and DRDS officers of DRDO, MoD posted in DRDO HQ in 2005.

April 14, 2015 Prabhu 3 Comments

To 14^th April 2015 Hon’ble Shri Manohar Parrikar, Defence Minister,Room No -104, South Block,New Delhi-110011

Subject: Submission of the facts of deliberate Acts and omissions of illegality, criminal offences under IPC 1860, misconducts under CCS Conduct Rules, 1964 and criminal misconducts under prevention of corruption Act 1988 committed in 2005 for conducting discreet independent enquiry and for registration of FIR against the prima facie guilty officers of AFHQ Cadre of the O/o JS (T) & CAO, MoD and DRDS officers of DRDO, MoD posted in DRDO HQ in 2005.

Sir, Please find the facts of deliberate Acts and omissions of illegality, criminal offences under IPC 1860, misconducts under CCS Conduct Rules, 1964 and criminal misconducts under prevention of corruption Act 1988 committed in 2005 for conducting discreet independent enquiry and for registration of FIR against the prima facie guilty officers of AFHQ Cadre of the O/o JS(T) & CAO, MoD and DRDS officers of DRDO, MoD posted in DRDO HQ in 2005. The Acts & Omissions are enclosed herewith in Annexure ‘A’ in a tabular form containing pages.

It is requested to conducted discreet complete enquiry in this regard exclusively from an independent authority like CVO of MoD and kindly register FIR against all those concerned retired and serving officers of AFHQ Cadre and DRDS Cadre of DRDO posted in DRDO HQ in 2005 if it is corroborated on documentary basis that they indeed committed the offences & misconducts mentioned in the Annexure ‘A’ enclosed herewith.

It is additionally request and caution your good self that the present regime in DRDO headed by Scientists in the O/o DOP, DHRD, CC R&D (HR) are in habit not to supply or adopt dilatory tactics in supplying the concerned original documents to the inquiry committee or they might even dilute the whole issue by constituting high power fact finding committee of scientists of DRDO who always put their best efforts to save the prima facie guilty officers.

It is therefore requested that all the concerned original documents available in DRDO HQ, New Delhi may kindly be called for in the O/o CVO, MoD at a very short notice within in a maximum period of a week so that saviors & sympathizers of the prima facie guilty officers are not able to protect the guilty officers.

I may kindly be intimated about the final outcome of my formal complaint at address for communication.

Regards

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

Enclosures:-

Annexure ‘A’ (containing 04 (four) pages)
Annexure ‘B’ (containing 04 (four) pages) of the copy of the Advt. published at page no 28 of the employment news dated 06-12 August 2005, copy of the RTI application dated 25-04-2014 submitted to the CPIO of DRDO HQ, New Delhi and copy of the RTI Reply dated 01-05-2014
RTI DRDO 25 April 2014

RTI DRDO 25 April 2014

rti reply DRDO

Drdo

RTI-PMO-GTRE -DRDO

April 9, 2015 Prabhu 3 Comments

To Date – 9^th April 2015 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 DRDO. It is observed that DRDO RTI cell is not providing any information in spite of providing corruption evidences.

Dr Tamilmani, DG(Aero), DRDO was used Rustom II project vehicle Toyota Innova bearing No # 14B 113597Y. The vehicle was procured for Project Rustom in the name of Remote Video Terminal Vehicle. Vide letter No DRDO/02/333/P/2/Vol-II-394/D/R&D date 23/02/2011.

After complaint to Hon Prime Minister on dated 26^th February 2015, the vehicle returned to project premises ADE, Bangalore.

GTRE, Bangalore purchased two Toyota Innova vehicle against project one vehicle is using by Director, GTRE, Dr.CP Ramanarayanan, surprisingly the another Toyota Innova vehicle bearing no ↑15B 115897Y was provided on 11^th March 2015 by GTRE, Bangalore to Dr Tamilmani, DG (Aero) against his demand dated 10^th March 2015

Provide the sanction letter of DHRD with financial concurrence of Ministry of Finance for purchasing two Toyota Innova vehicles by GTRE, Bangalore.
As per DRDO transport policy the project vehicles should use dedicatedly for project work, provide the DRDO hqrs approval for transfer the vehicle to Dr Tamilmani.
If Director, GTRE not obtained the permission for transferring the vehicle then provide the DRDO provisions for mishandling the project property without prior approval.
Copy of letter of DG (Aero)/Sectt/TSO/1/018 dated 10 March 2015 addressed to Director, GTRE for transfer the vehicle.

Note: The matter is related with corruption allegation that misuse of government funds and mislead to government. The return of vehicle itself proves that DRDO officials are openly wasted the public funds for their enjoyment.

Enclosed: Photograph of Rustom II project vehicle Toyota Innova bearing No ↑ 14B 113597Y with Brass Plate DG(Aero)

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 PMOIN/R/2015/60878

PMO

RTI- DRDO Via PMO

March 22, 2015 Prabhu 9 Comments

To Date 22^nd March 2015
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 corrupt practices following by DRDO.

The applicants already filed hundreds of RTI s to DRDO with the aim of expose their corrupt practices earlier up to end of 2011 I have received 50% informations in the basis of those inputs, I have submitted some corruption complaints to CVC and other agencies partly the action were taken but from mid of 2013 I have only received 10% informations but no action taken on corruption exposures. Interestingly since end 2013 DRDO stopped giving any informations against RTI applications, whether it is related to corruption or human right. I tried to my best requested RTI with enclosed corruption evidences but to DRDO refuses to all RTI requests under section 24 (1). DRDO have no respect for constitutional provision of GOI.

The following information is requested with evidences which prima facie supported that Dr Tamilmani and other involved in corrupt practices. This information is requesting through PMO because we have faith on Sh Narendra Modi ji government and if, we will not get any response of this RTI than it is a confirmation that PMO is also in the grip of corrupt officers and Modi ji government has no meaning of RTI Act 2005.

Provide the information that Toyota Innova using by Dr K Tamilmani, DG AERO, Director, ADE and others are procured under Project Rustom II as Remote Video Terminal Vehicle as stated in Dr.Hina Gokhle, DHRD
Provide total Toyota Innova/Scorpios/Safaris in the financial 2012/13, 2013/14 & 2014/15 with nomenclature used, project names by DRDO.
Provide the numbers of Directors/establishment Heads/in-charges of various siblings of DRDO using red beacon on their vehicles.
Provide the total amount dispersed as transport allowance in financial year 2014/15 to Directors/establishment Heads/Program Directors/project Directors /in-charges of various siblings of DRDO

Note – The matter is directly related to corruption and not exempted under section 24 1 of RTI Act 2005

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

Enclosed : 1. Paper cutting of Sunday Ttandard 22^nd March 22015

Photographs of Toyota Innova using by Dr K Tamilmani, Director ADE, Director, HEMRL, Director, DMSRDE,
Dr Hina Gokhle, DHRD letter in respect of vehicle sanction for project Rustom II

Dr Tamilmani January 2015 salary slip

Registration Number PMOIN/R/2015/60727

Sh Vikas Bhattacharya, Director, Using this To — Sh Vikas Bhattacharya, Director, Using this

Drdo

Breach of trust, criminal misconduct and gross violation of CCS (Conduct) Rules 1964 to misguide Hon’ble Defence Minister by Dr. A.K. Singh, Director (Personnel) , DRDO HQ, New Delhi.

November 14, 2014 Prabhu 20 Comments

To 14^th November 2014

Hon’ble

Shri Manohar Parrikar,

Defence Minister,

Room No -104, South Block,

New Delhi-110011

SUBJECT: Breach of trust, criminal misconduct and gross violation of CCS (Conduct) Rules 1964 to misguide Hon’ble Defence Minister by Dr. A.K. Singh, Director (Personnel) , DRDO HQ, New Delhi.

Hon’ble Sir,

I would like to draw your kind attention towards mischievous acts of Dr. A.K. Singh, Director (Personnel), DRDO HQ who is Scientist ‘G’ belonging to Life Sciences discipline. Though renowned Nuclear Medicine Scientist he is posted in Directorate related to HR like Staff Officer to CCR&D, Director, CEPTAM, DHRD and DOP since the year 2004. He has no knowledge and understanding of HR, Government Rules and Government Orders rather he is expert in manipulation of rules short term gains. Former Hon’ble Defence Minister, himself a renowned lawyer of India was mislead by Dr. A.K. Singh, Director (Personnel), DRDO resulted day by several court cases against DRDO in various courts across the country. Dr. A.K. Singh, Director (Personnel), DRDO is solely responsible for humiliation to DRDO, waste expenditure of public money and trouble to innocent scientists and employees of DRDO.

Due to this DRDO derailed from real task i.e. development of weapon technologies and most of top senior officials busy to tackle court cases and country’s precious time wasted on court formalities and height of this is CC (R&D) HR, DRDO fighting to save himself from jail punishment and wasting poor taxpayers money by engaging 4 top lawyers.

Hon’ble Sir, being an honest and simple person you are traveling in economy class to save public money but senior scientists of DRDO including Dr. A.K. Singh are enjoying business class travel and collecting flying points for family members.

Brief Facts of the Case

A.K. Singh, Director (Personnel) issued Order No. MON.GP/120576/M/01 dated 10 October 2014 by which states that “Competent Authority has come to the conclusion that the appointment of Ms. Swati Srivastava, Scientist ‘B’ (now Scientist ‘C’ ) in DRDO is irregular ab initio. Therefore , the President being the Competent Authority has dispensed with the requirement of holding another enquiry and has decided to annul the appointment of said Ms. Swati Srivastava, Scientist ‘B’ (now Scientist ‘C’) in DRDO with immediate effect invoking the provisions of DOP&T OM No. 11012/7/91-Estt. (A) dated 19.05.1993 read with the Rule 19(ii) of CCS(CCA) Rules 1965“. Copy of the Order dated 10 October 2014 is enclosed as Annexure-1.
Therefore it is pertinent to understand the provisions of said DOPT OM dated 19.05.1993 and Rule 19(ii) of CCS(CCA) Rules 1965.

DOP&T OM No. 11012/7/91-Estt. (A) dated 19.05.1993

Action against Government servants to be taken if they are later found ineligible or unqualified for their initial recruitment –

Attention of the Ministries/Departments is invited to Ministry of Home Affairs OM No. 39/1/67- Ests.(A) dated 21.02.1967 wherein it was clarified that departmental action can be taken against Government servant in respect of misconduct committed before his employment. Attention is also invited to the Ministry of Home Affairs OM No. 5/1/63-Estt. (D) dated 30.04.1965 wherein Ministries/Departments were requested to make use of the provision of ‘warning’ inserted in the Attestation Form for taking action against Government servant furnishing false information at the time of appointment.

A question has now arisen as to whether a Government Servant can be discharged from service where it is discovered later that the Government servant was not qualified or eligible for his initial recruitment in service. The Supreme Court in its judgment in the District Collector, Vizianagram vs. M. Tripura Sundari Devi (1990(4) SLR 237 went into this issue and observed as under :-

“It must further be realized by all concerned that when an advertisement mentions a particular qualification and an appointment is made in disregard of the same, it is not a matter only between the appointing authority and the appointee concerned. The aggrieved are all those who had similar or better qualifications than the appointee or appointees but who had not applied for the post because they did not possess the qualifications mentioned in the advertisement. It amounts to a fraud on public to appoint a person with inferior qualifications in such circumstances unless it is clearly stated that the qualifications are relaxable. No Court should be a party to the perpetuation of the fraudulent practice.”

The matter has been examined in consultation with the Ministry of Law and Justice and it has now been decided that wherever it is found that a Government servant, who was not qualified or eligible in terms of the recruitment rules etc, for initial recruitment in service or had furnished false information or produced a false certificate in order to secure appointment, he should not be retained in service. If he is a probationer or a temporary Government servant, he should be discharged or his services should be terminated. If he has become a permanent Government servant, an inquiry as prescribed in Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 may be held and if the charges are proved, the Government servant should be removed or dismissed from service. In no circumstances should any other penalty be imposed.

Such discharge, termination, removal or dismissal from service would, however, be without prejudice to the right of the Government to prosecute such Government servants.

[Deptt. Of Personnel & Training OM No. 11012/7/91-Estt. (A) dated 19.05.1993]

Rule 19 of CCS(CCA) Rules 1965

Special procedure in certain cases

Notwithstanding anything contained in rule 14 to rule 18-

(i) where any penalty is imposed on a Government servant on the ground of conduct which has led to his conviction on a criminal charge, or

(ii) where the disciplinary authority is satisfied for reasons to be recorded by it in writing that it is not reasonably practicable to hold an inquiry in the manner provided in these rules,

(iii) where the President is satisfied that in the interest of the security of the State, it is not expedient to hold any inquiry in the manner provided in these rules, the disciplinary authority may consider the circumstances of the case and make such orders thereon as it deems fit:

Provided that the Government servant may be given an opportunity of making representation on the penalty proposed to be imposed before any order is made in a case under clause (i):

Provided further that the Commission shall be consulted, where such consultation is necessary, before any orders are made in any case under this rule.

Mere reading of the provisions of said OM dated 19.05.1993 stipulates that:
If he has become a permanent Government servant, an inquiry as prescribed in Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 may be held.
if the charges are proved, the Government servant should be removed or dismissed from service.

In no circumstances should any other penalty be imposed.

All the above three provisions of said OM dated 19.05.1993 were grossly violated in Order No. MON.GP/120576/M/01 dated 10 October 2014 issued by Dr. A.K. Singh under planned conspiracy and mischief the Hon’ble Defence Minister. The major irregularities and facts related to the Order dated 10 October 2014 to annul the appointment of Ms. Swati Srivastava, Scientist ‘C’ are as under:
It is quite obvious from order that charges of illegal appointment on Ms. Swati Srivastava was established as she was not having requisite qualification and submitted false information at time of her initial recruitment.
She became permanent employee of DRDO in past ten years after his appointment in DRDO.

In case of permanent employee if the charges are proved, the Government servant should be removed or dismissed from service.

In no circumstances should any other penalty be imposed.
To annul the appointment is totally illegal as there is no such provision to annul the appointment in CCS(CCA) Rules 1965.
Ms. Swati Srivastava was recruited in DRDO for post of Scientist ‘B’ and the case is of recruitment of Ms. Swati Srivastava as Scientist ‘B’.

The DOPT OM No. 11012/7/91-Estt. (A) dated 19.05.1993 deals with “Action against Government servants to be taken if they are later found ineligible or unqualified for their initial recruitment”. The whole case of Ms. Swati Srivastava , Scientist ‘C’ was related to her illegal initial recruitment not the appointment.
A. K. Singh, DOP mentioned illegal recruitment as irregular appointment.

Inquiry under Rule 14 of CCS(CCA) Rules 1965 was knowingly dispensed/dropped by misusing Rule 19(2) so that penalty of dismissal or removal should not be imposed upon Ms. Swati Srivastava by Dr. A. K. Singh, DOP by DRDO.
Whole exercise and conspiracy was planned by Dr. A. K. Singh , DOP to patronage and protect the interest of Ms. Swati Srivastava , Scientist ‘C’.
Illegal order dated 10 October 2014 was knowingly issued by Dr. A. K. Singh , DOP so that Ms. Swati Srivastava , Scientist ‘C’ can challenge the order dated 10 October 2014 to annul her appointment and come back in DRDO based on court order.
Establishing the above narrated facts, Ms. Swati Srivastava , Scientist ‘C’ moved to Principal Bench of Central Administrative Tribunal vide A./3809/2014 with first hearing on 12.11.2014. Copy of cause list of 12.11.2014 , CAT, New Delhi is attached for ready reference.
Therefore in the interest of DRDO and public of the nation justice should be meted out as per Law and following actions are requested to your honest and transparent office.
Order for dismissal or removal from service of Ms. Swati Srivastava, Scientist ‘C’ should be issued as per obligation of the DOP&T OM 11012/7/91-Estt. (A) Dated 19.05.1993.
A.K. Singh, Director(Personnel) should immediately be removed from post of Director(Personnel) and proper high level inquiry should be conducted for his role in nepotism , conspiracy, breach of trust,violations of conduct rules and wastage of public money.
As all four cases of Recruitment Scam is under probe of CBI vide CVO, MOD note approved by former Hon’ble Defence Minister Sri A.K. Antony on 29.10.2013, therefore this irregularity and misconduct for nepotism by Dr. K. Singh, Director(Personnel) should be referred to CBI to investigate role of Dr. A.K. Singh in issuance of such illegal order dated 10 Oct 2014 to favour Ms. Swati Srivastava, Scientist ‘C’.

Regards

Prabhu Dandriyal,

21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun,

Ph 0135 2787750, Mobile 9411114879,

e-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com website www.corruptionindrdo.com

(10) Action against Government servants to be taken if they are later found ineligible or

unqualified for their initial recruitment –

Attention of the Ministries/Departments is invited to Ministry of Home Affairs OM No. 39/1/67-Ests.(A) dated 21.02.1967 wherein it was clarified that departmental action can be taken against Government servant in respect of misconduct committed before his employment. Attention is also invited to the Ministry of Home Affairs OM No. 5/1/63-Estt. (D) dated 30.04.1965 where in Ministries/Departments were requested to make use of the provision of ‘warning’ inserted in the Attestation Form for taking action against Government servant furnishing false information at the time of appointment.

A question has now arisen as to whether a Government Servant can be discharged from service where it is discovered later that the Government servant was not qualified or eligible for his initial recruitment in service. The Supreme Court in its judgment in the District Collector,Vizianagram vs. M. Tripura Sundari Devi (1990(4) SLR 237 went into this issue and observed asunder :-

“It must further be realized by all concerned that when an advertisement mentions a particular qualification and an appointment is made in disregard of the same, it is not a matter only between the appointing authority and the appointee concerned. The aggrieved are all those who had similar or better qualifications than the appointee or appointees but who had not applied for the post because they did not possess the qualifications mentioned in the advertisement. It amounts to a fraud on public to appoint a person with inferior qualifications in such circumstances unless itis clearly stated that the qualifications are relaxable. No Court should be a party to the perpetuation of the fraudulent practice.”

Such discharge, termination, removal or dismissal from service would, however, be without prejudice to the right of the Government to prosecute such Government servants.

[Deptt. Of Personnel & Training OM No. 11012/7/91-Estt. (A) dated 19.05.1993]

Action against Government Servants who get appointment on the basis of false SC/ST/OBC certificates.

No.36011/1/2012-Estt. (Res.)

Government of India

Department of Personnel and Training

Establishment (Reservation) Section

North Block, New Delhi-110001

Dated the 10th January, 2013.

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Sub:- Action against Government servants who get appointment on the basis of false SC/ST/OBC certificates.

The undersigned is directed to invite reference to this Department’s OM No.11012/7/91-Estt.(A) dated 19.5.1993 which provides as under:-

“Wherever it is found that a Government servant, who was not qualified or eligible in terms of the recruitment rules etc., for initial recruitment in service or had furnished false information or produced a false certificate in order to secure appointment, he should not be retained in service. If, he is probationer or a temporary Government servant, he should be discharged or his services should be terminated. If he has become a permanent Government servant, an inquiry as prescribed in Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 may be held and if the charges are proved, the Government servant should be removed or dismissed from service. In no circumstances should any penalty be imposed”.

The position was reiterated vide this Department’s OM No.42011/22/2006-Estt.(Res.) dated the 29th March, 2007 that the cases other than those protected by the specific order of the Apex Court should be dealt with in accordance with the instructions contained in the aforesaid O.M. However, it has been observed that disciplinary proceedings in the cases involving appointments on the basis of false/fake caste certificates take considerable time and the persons who have secured employment on the basis of false caste certificates enjoy the benefits of Government service whereas such Government servants should be removed / dismissed from the service at the earliest.
It is requested that disciplinary inquiries involving the matter of securing jobs on the basis of false/fake certificates should be completed in a time bound manner and unscrupulous persons who have got appointment on the basis of fake/ false caste certificates should not be retained in service and should be dismissed / removed thenceforth.
Contents of this OM may be brought to the notice of all concerned.

sd/-

(Sharad Kumar Srivastava)

Under Secretary to the Government of India

Source : www.persmin.nic.in

[http://ccis.nic.in/WriteReadData/CircularPortal/D2/D02adm/36011_1_2012-Estt-Res.pdf]

Drdo

Scraps the promotions for Scientist ‘F’ to Scientist ‘G’ in DRDO year 2011

October 18, 2014 Prabhu 11 Comments

Hon’ble

Shri Narendra Modi

Prime Minister of India

PMO, South Block

New Delhi-110011

Subject: Scraps the promotions for Scientist ‘F’ to Scientist ‘G’ in DRDO year 2011

Hon’ble Sir,

Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) is an organisation under MOD having annual budget of Rs. 15000 crore for FY 2014-2015. This organisation is having about 7500 scientists under DRDS cadre who are comprising of more than 50 scientific disciplines and working in their respective area based on his qualification and discipline.
Prior to the formation of the Recruitment & Assessment Centre(RAC) in DRDO the recruitments and promotions of scientists in DRDO were made by UPSC. Later on Government of India allowed DRDO to have its own recruitment & assessment body for recruitment and assessment of scientists under DRDS cadre. Consequently an in-house Recruitment & Assessment Centre (RAC) was created in DRDO in 90’s. RAC conducts recruitment of scientists in DRDO and assessment of scientists for promotion from the grade of Scientist ‘B’ to Scientist ‘H’.
All scientists of DRDO comes under the Defence Research & Development Services(DRDS) cadre and under the provisions of Article 309 of Constitution of India, Government of India framed The Defence Research & Development Service Rules 1979 (DRDS Rules 1979) as Recruitment & Promotion Rules for DRDS cadre.
DOPT, GOI framed Flexible Complementing Scheme (FCS) for faster promotions of scientists working in all S&T Department/Organisations under Central Government. Consequently from past 35 years DOPT issued various OM & Notifications for FCS from IIIrd CPC to VIth CPC.
The OM No. 2/41/97-PICdated 9th Nov 1998 and OM No. AB-1401713712008-Estt(RR)dated 10th September, 2010issued by DOPT are umbrella notifications for FCS.
Vide SRO 11(E) dated 10th August 1990, FCS was introduced in DRDS Rules 1979 and under the provisions of Rule 8(2)(a) of DRDS Rules 1979 it clearly mentioned that promotions from the rank Scientist ‘B’ to Scientist ‘H’ (Outstanding Scientist) are covered under the FCS. Copy of the Rule 8(2)(a) is annexed as Annexure-1.
In DRDO scientists are recruited based on the requirement of various Lab/Estt which were sent to RAC through DRDO HQ and then RAC recruits the scientists based on their discipline, qualifications, experience and other requirement as sought by Labs/Estt of DRDO.
Under the provisions of OM No.AB-1401713712008-Estt(RR) dated 10th September, 2010of DOPT the promotions under FCS are applicable to the scientist who are working in S&T organisation/department and involved in Scientific &Technological work. Scientists/ Technical experts doing management/ administrative work in the Ministries should not be considered for up gradation under FCS, they should only be given benefit of up gradation under MACP. Copy of page no. 06 of the OM annexed as Annexure-2.
Procedure of promotion from grade of Scientist ‘F’ to Scientist ‘G’ till 2010 were followed as provided under Rule 8(2)(a) of DRDS Rules 1979 and the same procedure supposed to be followed in 2011 for promotions from grade of Scientist ‘F’ to Scientist ‘G’but the RAC, DRDO adopted the new procedure illegally without amending the DRDS Rules 1979 by issuing SRO under the provisions of Article 309 of the Constitution.
DRDS Rules 1979 clearly stipulates that DRDS Rules can be amended only by issuing an SRO under Article 309 of the Constitution of India. DRDO violated the Article 309 by implementing interview/interaction in promotion of scientist ‘F’ to scientist ‘G’ grade in 2011 without proper amendment in SRO.
In this matter Dr. A.K. Singh, Scientist ‘G’ (then Director, DHRD) issued letter No. DHRD/76145/C/M/01 dated 21 March 2011 on the Subject ” Assessment of Sc ‘F’ for promotion- revised procedure of” to Director, RAC. Copy of the letter dated 21 March 2011 is annexed as Annexure-3.
Dr. A.K. Singh issued the said letter illegally without issuing of any SRO in the subject matter as in the year 2011 Dr. A.K. Singh himself was appearing in assessment as candidate for promotion from grade of Scientist ‘F’ to Scientist ‘G’ and wanted to be get benefitted by the said new procedure for assessment.
Based upon the letter of Dr. A.K. Singh dated 21 March 2011, Dr. P.S. Goel, then Chairman, RAC issued his DO letter No. RAC/01/Assessment/PSG, dated 22 March 2011 regarding “Promotions for grade of Scientist ‘F’ to Scientist ‘G”. Copy of the letter dated 22 March 2011 is annexed as Annexure-4.[How quickly the letter by Dr. P.S. Goel was issued on 22 March 2011, this establish planned conspiracy]
Dr. P. S. Goel and Dr. A.K. Singh planned whole conspiracy of the said illegal assessment in the year 2011 in DRDO with help of then Dr. V.K. Saraswat then DGR&D, DRDO.
Dr. P.S. Goel introduced this illegal mechanism to give favour to few incompetent DRDO scientists and for this act in return he got Prof. MGKMenon Chair, RCI, Hyderabad which fed him 84 lakhs per year. It is pure kick back or DRDO should provethe justification of his appointment. Dr. A.K. Singh himself promoted in the year 2011 by misusing this illegal mechanism for assessment in the year 2011.
There was noassessment interview requirement for promotion from scientist ‘F’ to scientist ‘G’ as per the DRDO service rule-1979-Rule-8(2)(e) till 2011 , but Chairman, Recruitment and Assessment Centre (RAC) of DRDO forwarded name before promotion committee after “ INTERACTION ’’ .
The SRO No. 21 for the amending DRDS Rules 1979 was published in official gazette of Government of India on 23 March 2012. Copy of the SRO 21 dated 23 March 2012 is annexed as Annexure-5.
The list of Scientist ‘F’ that were illegally promoted to Scientist ‘G’in the year 2011 is annexed asAnnexure-6.
Sir , all these promotion from grade of scientist ‘F’ to scientist ‘G’ in the year 2011 were illegal and liable to be scrapped as it amounts corruption , nepotism and misuse of power for personal gain by Dr. A.K. Singh being Director, DHRD who issued illegal letter dated 21 March 2011.Therefore promotion of Dr. A.K. Singh, Scientist ‘G’ , Director of Personnel should be quashed/scrapped and through investigation in the matter may be ordered to give justice to the all affected Scientist ‘F’ of DRDO and fix the accountability of the corrupt culprits in the matter.

Regards PrabhuDandriyal, 21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun -248008 0135- 2787750, 9411114879, prabhudoon@gmail.com www.corruptionindrdo.com ANNEXURES-

Copy of the Rule 8(2)(a) , DRDS Rules 1979
Page no. 6 of OM No. AB-1401713712008-Estt(RR) dated 10th September, 2010
Copy of the letter dated 21 March 2011 issued by Director, DHRD, DRDO
Copy of the letter dated 22 March 2011 issued by Chairman, RAC, DRDO
Copy of the SRO 21 dated 23 March 2012.
The list of Scientist ‘F’ that were illegally promoted to Scientist ‘G’ in the 2011

Drdo

Poor HR of DRDO- The Great Nuclear Medicine Scientist Dr. A.K. Singh posted as Director of Personnel at DRDO HQ

October 16, 2014 Prabhu 39 Comments

To Date 16^th October 2014

Hon’ble

Shri Narendra Modi,

Prime Minister of India,

Room No -152, PMO, South Block,

New Delhi-110011

Subject : Request to utilized scientific potential of Dr. A.K. Singh, DOP, DRDO HQ to Lab/Estt under Life Sciences Cluster

Hon’ble Sir,

Human Resource is an asset of an organisation and proper utilisation and deployment of its HR/Manpower is challenging job for an organisation especially on DRDO which holding very significant responsibility for the nation. In the past several years DRDO cannot meet its target well within time and seeking extensions in PDC again & again in several major projects of national significance. This drawback of DRDO has been noticed by Hon’ble Ex-PM Dr. Manmohan Singh, Ex- Defence Minister Shri A.K. Antony, CAG, CGDA, Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence (15th Lok Sabha). This has been also noticed and criticised by you in DRDO Award Function on 20^th August 2014 by saying “Chalta Hai wala attitude nahin chalega“.

Poor HR planning and deployment of scientists in various Lab/Estt of DRDO is major reason for not delivering the products and timely completion of project. Almost each and every lab/Estt all sundry work (Admin/Stores/Security/MTO/Library/works/ conservancy etc) are managed by qualified scientist and technical officials (more than 15% of total strength of DRDO) Simultaneously they are drawing all perks which is provided towards incentive in the name of scientific encouragement and also enjoying flexible complementary scheme on promotions which is also strictly for those who dedicatedly involve in scientific and technical assignments.

HR of DRDO comes under CCR&D (HR) which consisted of DOP, DHRD, RAC, CEPTAM, DESIDOC, ITM, MILIT, DIAT, DPI and RTI Cell. Presently Dr. G. Malakondiah, Distinguished Scientist is holding the charge of CCR&D (HR) and he was convicted by Madras High Court for imprisonment of three weeks in case of contempt of court this the highest example of ignorance of constitutions provision.

One such example of poor HR planning of DRDO is of Dr. A.K. Singh, Director, Directorate of Personnel, DRDO HQ, New Delhi. Dr. A.K.Singh, Scientist ‘G’ is great Nuclear Medicine scientist of India with five patents granted, fourteen patents filed, one copy right and more than fifty publications in international & national journals.Bio-Data of Dr. A.K. Singh is annexed.

As a matter of fact, despite having so many scientific contributions in area of Nuclear Medicines which is primarily used for treatment of cancer, brain tumours and complex diseases.

Dr. A.K. Singh was basically recruited for projects of DRDO in its New Delhi based unique laboratory working in Nuclear Medicine, Institute of Nuclear Medicine and Allied Sciences (INMAS). He worked in INMAS till the year 2004 but all of sudden he was transferred in DRDO HQ and assigned non-technical clerical assignments like Staff Officer to CCR&D.

Since the year 2004, the great Nuclear Medicine scientist is working non-scientific work like Director, CEPTAM, Director, DHRD and presently DOP. The work assigned to Dr. A.K. Singh is of administrative nature for which DRDO is having it’s another HR cadre known as administrative cadre and from this cadre manpower should be appointed in DOP.

Being a bonafide life science scientist, Dr. A.K. Singh, DOP not having any expertise in field of HR, therefore, he made several wrong decisions due to which DRDO faces lot of embarrassment and bad fame in media, it also affected various officials of DRDO who are facing several court cases in various courts all over India, even 15^th October 2014 he received notice from CAT Delhi for his misadventure towards a senior scientist who belong to minority. This created lot of expenditure in term of fees to lawyers, TA/DA to attend court cases and cause of derailing scientific research tempo of DRDO.

Government of India is paying more than Rupees twenty lakhs to Dr. A.K. Singh, DOP for his non-productive and non-scientific work that can be carried out by any of the officer of Joint Director/Additional Director of DRDO from the admin cadre. DRDO wasting poor tax payers money.

Dr. A.K. Sigh is great Nuclear Medicine Scientist which is rare in DRDO. The discipline of Dr. A.K. Singh is from Life Sciences so proper utilization of his potential to posted him in Laboratory/ Establishment of DRDO under Life Sciences Cluster so he can contribute more in the national interest.

There are nine (09) Lab/Estt under Life Sciences Cluster of DRDO spread over all India. These are DEBEL, DIPAS, DIPR, INMAS, DRL, DIBER, DFRL, DIHAR & DRDE. Life sciences scientists are 120+ out of 7500 total DRDO scientist’s strength so proper utilization of these 9 labs can only possible when all life science scientists dedicatedly posted in Life Sciences Cluster of DRDO not in HR related Corporate Directorate. Dr A K Singh qualified life science scientist but he convert his field into technical services in the official records while as per his biodata he is fit for life sciences activities.

Sir you know the maxim “wrong shoe in right leg- “. Similar is the case of Dr. A.K. Singh who has been wrongly posted in HR assignments of DRDO while he is great Nuclear Medicine scientist with international fame scientific contributions in Nuclear Medicine. He is very much required in Lab/Estt of DRDO that are working in specialization of Dr. A.K. Singh like Defence Research Laboratory, Tezpur, Defence Research & Development Establishment, Gwalior, DEBEL, Bangalore and INMAS, New Delhi. Since Dr. A.K. Singh had already worked in INMAS, New Delhi for more than 16 years and his experience was bitter at INMAS thereby he was expelled from projects and scientific assignments at INMAS, New Delhi. Therefore the ,most suitable work places for getting output from his scientific knowledge and experience is DRL, Tezpur, DRDE, Gwalior and DEBEL, Bangalore.

Keeping in view of the facts stated above, to save public revenue and streamline HR of DRDO, it is very much required that scientists of the DRDO having educational qualification and experiences in life sciences should be posted in Lab/Estt under Life Sciences Cluster of DRDO.

Therefore I kindly and earnestly request you to start “operation clean- Swachta Abhiyan” in DRDO by transferring Dr. A.K. Singh, DOP from DRDO HQ to any of the Life Sciences Cluster Lab/Estt like DRL, Tezpur, DRDE, Gwalior or DEBEL, Bangalore so that poor & dirty HR of DRDO may be rich & clean.

Regards

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

Annexure-

Bio-data of Dr. A. K. Singh, Director, DOP
Corporate Structure of DRDO (Download from DRDO website)

Drdo

डीआरडीओ में श्री अविनाश चन्दर, वैज्ञानिक सलाहकार की चल रही है जागीरदारी (Example of Sh Avinash Chander’s feudalism in DRDO)

September 14, 2014 Prabhu 1 Comment

माननीय श्रीनरेंद्र मोदी जी दिनाक 14 सितम्बर2014

प्रधानमंत्री

कक्षसंख्या 152 पीएमओ

साउथ ब्लाक नईदिल्ली -110011

विषय : डीआरडीओमें श्री अविनाश चन्दर, वैज्ञानिक सलाहकार द्वारा जागीरदारी

माननीय श्री प्रधानमंत्री जी यह एक बड़े खेद का विषय है कि इतने महत्वपूर्ण संगठन के शीर्ष अधिकारी श्री अविनाश चन्दर जी ने सारी नैतिकताओं को दर किनार करते हुए डीआरडीओ में अपनी जागीरदारी चला रखी है।

आपने दिल्ली में जो देख कर जनता को लालकिले से अपना अनुभव बताया कि सब विभागों में अपनी अपनी जागीरदारी चल रही है वह एक पूर्ण सत्य है।

श्री अविनाश चन्दर जी ने अभी कुछ समय पहले एक वैज्ञानिक ‘जी’ पद में बहुत ही मनमाने ढंग सब नियत मानको की अनदेखी कर रिटायर कमोडोर सरोज पटेल की नियुक्ति करी है।

श्री अविनाश चन्दर जी ने रिटायर कमोडोर सरोज पटेल की सिर्फ नियुक्ति ही नहीं करी बल्कि डीआरडीओ के 507 वरिष्ठ वैज्ञानिक ‘जी’ की वरिष्ठता को दरकिनार करते हुए श्री पटेल को नियुक्ति के चार दिनों में डायरेक्टर के पद में भी बैठा कर वैज्ञानिको का मनोबल गिरा दिया है।

पूरे देश ने कारगिल जंग के समय डीआरडीओ की असफलताओ को देखा था और सबको जनरल मालिक के शब्द याद है ” डीआरडीओ के वजह से सेना वेपन लोकेटर रडार नहीं प्राप्त हो पाया और जिसके कारण सेना को अपने इतने जवान खोने पड़े”

आपसे आशा है की निम्न प्रेषित उक्त नियुक्ति की धांधली के पूर्ण विवरण को सी वी सी को जाँच के लिए आदेश देंगे जिससे डीआरडीओ के समर्पित वैज्ञानिको का मनोबल बढ़ सके और वे देश की विकास में भागीदारी में अपना पूर्ण योगदान कर सके।

धन्यवाद

प्रभुडंडरियाल

21-सुंदरवाला, रायपुर, देहरादून

फ़ोन 0135- 2787750, मोबाइल – 9411114879,

e-मेल id prabhudoon@gmail.com वेबसाइट www.corruptionindrdo.com

To 14^th September 2014

Central Vigilance Commissioner,

Central Vigilance Commission,

Satarkta Bhawan, A- Block,

GPO Complex, INA,

New Delhi-110023

SUBJECT:RECRUITMENT SCAM –II IN DRDO

Recruitment of Sh Saroj Kumar Patel, Scientist ‘G’ and Appointment on post of Director, Directorate of Quality, Reliability &Safety (DQRS), DRDO HQ Complaint against Sh Avinash Chander, DG, DRDO, SA to RM, Secretary, DRD

Sir,

Nepotism, favoritism, corruption and manipulations with vested interest in higher recruitment by misusing powers by HOD are very common practices now days in Government system by different means.

Based on the practices stated above, the Recruitment Scam-I occurred in DRDO in which several top Scientists including some ex-DGR&D, ex-CCR&D, ex-Directors and their daughters & relatives were involved. Several complaints were made to CVC & Defence Minister regarding Recruitment Scam-I and consequently CVC advices disciplinary action against Dr. Arun Kumar, Ex-DOP under major penalty vide OM No. 010/DEF/039/184877 dated 23.08.2012.(Copy enclosed-I).

Dr. Arun Kumar was suspended on the last day of his superannuation. Similarly some other Scientist Dr. S M Veerbhadrapa, Ex-Director, DTRL then HRD Charge Sheeted and Smt Chandra bano, Scientist ‘F’, DHRD was dismissed from service just 12 days before retirement. Since top ten officials of DRDO involved in Recruitment Scam-I were retired therefore on advice of Director (Vigilance) & CVO, Min. of Defence , then Defence Minister recommended CBI probe in Recruitment Scam-I of DRDO vide Dte (Vigilance), MOD note no.48-55 ante observations of JS & CVO at note 56 ante in November 2013. The news was published in media. Copy enclosed (II).

Shri Avinash Chander then CCR&D(MSS) also played an important role in Recruitment Scam-I while being member of expert committee under Chairmanship of Prof. SK Salwan, he gave clean chit to his friend Dr. Arun Kumar , ex-DOP vide his report dated 08.06.2011.

This case is regarding illegal recruitment with motivated planned conspiracy of Shri Avinash Chander, DG, DRDO and SA to RM, Dr. A.K. Singh, DOP and Smt. Hina Gokhle, Director, DHRD and Dr. RK Jain, Director, RAC and Dr. DN Reddy, Chairman, RAC.

BRIEF FACTS OF THE COMPLAINT

Shri Avinash Chander, DS was Director, ASL, Hyderabad from August 2005 to May 2011. He was appointed as CCR&D (MSS) in DRDO HQ and was holding position of no. 2 after Dr. V.K. Saraswat, then DGR&D and SA to RM. Shri Avinash Chander took over as DGR&D, DRDO and SA to RM wef 31 May 2013 after superannuation of Dr. V.K. Saraswat.
Smt. Tessy Thomas was working in ASL since its foundation and she was subordinate to Shri Avinash Chander when he was Director, ASL, Hyderabad. Smt Tessy Thomas was promoted to Scientist ‘H’/Outstanding Scientist wef 18 October 2013. She was appointed as Director, ASL, Hyderabad wef 25 July 2014.
As a matter of facts, the competent authority in DRDO for appointment of Directors of Lab/Estt and Directorates at DRDO HQ is Shri Avinash Chander DGR&D, DRDO and SA to RM.
Shri Saroj Kumar Patel, husband of Smt Tessy Thomas, OS (now Director, ASL) was serving in Indian Navy as Commodore and retired from Indian Navy on 31 January 2013. To oblige Smt Tessy Thomas, Shri Avinash Chander, then CCR&D(MSS) misused his position and succeeded in creation of a vacancy of Scientist ‘G’ in DRDO HQ and applications for this vacancy of Scientist ‘G’ were sought vide RAC Advt No. 110/December 2012. (Copy enclosed-III)
The Scientist ‘G’ in DRDO is having pay scale of Rs. 37,400-67,000/- & Grade Pay 10,000/-, which is equivalent to rank of Joint Secretary in Indian Administrative Services. Joint Secretary to the Government of India has pay scale in Pay Band – 4:Rs. 37400- 67000; and Grade Pay Rs. 10000.All promotions and appointments to this Joint Secretary rank and post are directly made by the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (ACC).
The requirement of said vacancy of Scientist ‘G’ was tailor made for Shri Saroj Kumar Patel as evident from details of Advt. No. 110/December 2012.

SN	Criteria	RAC Advt. No. 110/Dec 2012	Bio-data of Shri SK Patel
	Lab./Estt.	DRDO	Already posted at DRDO HQ
	Subject/Discipline	Mechanical Engineering	Mechanical Engineering
	Qualification Essential Desirable	At least first class Bachelor’s Degree in Mechanical Engineering from a recognized University or equivalent.	B.Sc. (Mechanical Engg.)
	Qualification Essential Desirable	ME/M Tech Degree in relevant subject.	M.Tech
	Experience / Specialisation	Experience in the field of Quality, Reliability and Safety management of weapons and Armament Systems with involvementduring development/production/induction and life cycle management. Knowledge of guided weapons is also desirable.	Not Available

This malpractice for recruitment of Shri Saroj Kumar Patel was exposed by some senior Scientist ‘G’ of DRDO by writing complaint to Hon’ble Defence Minister in 2013 and therefore the plan of Shri Avinash Chander failed due to seriously consideration of the matter by Dr. V.K. Saraswat, then DGR&D, DRDO and SA to RM.
Shri Avinash Chander took over as DGR&D, DRDO and SA to RM on 31 May 2013 after superannuation of Dr. V.K. Saraswat. After acquiring full administrative & financial powers in DRDO, Shri Avinash Chander planned the recruitment of Shri Saroj Kumar Patel as Scientist ‘G’ in DRDO and therefore he planned a conspiracy of the illegal & motivated recruitment with help of his subordinates Dr. A.K. Singh, DOP, Smt. Hina Gokhle, Director, DHRD and Dr. DN Reddy, Chairman, RAC and Shri RK Jain, Director, RAC.
Accordingly phase-II of the said conspiracy started by issue of Letter No. DOP/11/110059/QRSM/M/02 dated 14 August 2013 of Directorate of Personnel, DRDO, MOD, New Delhi on the Subject- Appointment of Director, QRS, DRDO HQ, New Delhi. Copy of the letter dated 14 August 2013 along with Proforma for Director, QRS, DRDO HQ, New Delhi is enclosed-IV.
It was clearly mentioned in Para(1) of the letter that “Applications for the post of Director, Quality, Reliability & Safety(QRS) at DRDO HQrs, New Delhi are invited from SC ‘G’ promoted in the year 2013 having sufficient experience in the field of quality, reliability and safety. The Para 1 of letter is arbitrary, discriminatory, unethical and illegal in nature.
No essential qualification, desirable qualification and years of experience were sought and mentioned in said DOP letter for the post of Director, QRS.
Question arises why applications were invited only from the Scientist ‘G’ that were promoted in the year 2013 while in the seniority list of Scientist ‘G’ of DRDO as on 1^st November 2013 there were 507 Scientist ‘G’ in total and out of which 114 were promoted in the year 2013 with effect from 01 July 2013? Copy of the seniority list of Scientist ‘G’ is enclosed-V. Why senior Scientist ‘G’ were not eligible for the post