To Date 23rd November 2013 The CPIO, DRDO HQ Room No. 314A DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg New Delhi – 110105
Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in respect to Dr Prahalada, Vice Chancellor, DIAT, Pune. As per CPIO DRDO reply RTI/02/2091/C/2011 dated 27th Sep 2011 File No. CIC/LS/A12011/000412 para (d) Dr. Prahiada, CC R&D (Ae& SI) & DS, DRDO HQrs availed DRDO guest house facility in Delhi from 26 Mar 2010 to 20 Mar 2011. But the fact is Dr. Prahiada, CC R&D (Ae& SI) & DS, DRDO HQrs availed DRDO guest house facility since 2005 after his posting from DRDL, Hyderabad. As per DRDO Hqrs telephone Directory from 2005 to 2010 Dr. Prahiada’s residence showed C-7, DRDO Guest House Qutab Enclave, New Delhi.
Please provide the copy the document/ noting / any written paper received by CPIO, DRDO Hqrs from establishment in respect to Dr. Prahiada’s stay in DRDO guest house since 26th Mar 2010 to 20th Mar 2011
Please provide total amount that was recovered from Dr. Prahiada.
Copy of disciplinary action taken against Dr. Prahiada for illegally claimed HRA, if any.
Residence proof of Dr. Prahiada which he produced to JCDA for availing HRA since his posting to DRDO Hqrs in 2005.
Kindly refer to following decisions of Central Information Commission and verdict given in these decisions.
File No. CIC/LS/A/2012/002612 dated 22.3.2013 (Dr. Neelam Bhalla vs. DRDO) Verdict – It is, no doubt, true that DRDO is an exempted organisation yet it has been the consistent view of this Commission that the benefit of exemption extends only to functional / operational matters and not to establishment related routine matters. The legality of this view has not been challenged in the relevant judicial forum so far.
Note: – Above required information is directly related to corruption and does not come under schedule II. As you are aware recently Defence Minister issued charge sheet to Dr A K Tyagi in connection to his involvement in DIAT library procurement. Dr Prahalada, Vice Chancellor, DIAT, Pune extended all help to Dr A K Tyagi for manipulation of documents, like when I sought information regarding the DIAT library the very next day Dr A K Tyagi visited DIAT on temporary duty in the name of RTI awareness program etc. It is only due to as CPIO, DRDO Hqrs Dr A K Tyagi provided false information of Dr. Prahiada’s stay in DRDO guest house and Dr. Prahlada was able to digest poor tax payer’s money (4 years HRA).
To Date 30th August 2013
The CPIO, DRDO HQ
Room No. 314A
DRDO Bhawan, RajajiMarg
New Delhi – 110105
Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in respect of Board Proceeding held on 11th March 2008 in DIAT for the purpose of scrutinize existing procedures for procurement of Books for library and check anomalies.
Certified copy of R O No 41 of 10/2008 dated 15th February 2008.
Certified copy of comments made by Vice Chancellor, DIAT on the findings submitted by Board of Officers. (Copy of findings enclosed)
Note: – above required information is directly related to corruption and not come under schedule – II. Because the recovery from DRDO officials proved that the some senior DRDO officials were indulged in corrupt practices.
Find the application fee for the request attached with this application. If you feel that above requested information does not pertain to your department then please follow the provisions of Section 6(3) of the RTI act 2005. Also as per the provision of the RTI Act 2005 please provide the details (Name and Designation) of the first appellate authority w.r.t. to your department with the reply to above request, where I may require file first appeal.
I do hereby declare that I am the citizen of India. Kindly provide me with the information at the address mentioned with the application. I request you to ensure that the information is provided before expiry of 30 day period after you have received the application.
To Date 10th August 2013The CPIO No RTI/DIAT/AKT/10/8/2013 Defence Institute of Armment Technology (DIAT) Simhagad Road, Girinagar Pune-411 025
Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005. In respect of enquiry held under chairmanship of Sh Vijay Deshmukh to investigate financial irregularities done by Dr A K Tyagi then OI/C,IC&L, Finance Officer of DIAT Library.
The certified copy of final report of above mentioned enquiry committee.
Any action taken by Vice Chancellor, DIAT- yes/no
Copy of comments by then Prof. L M Patnaik,Vice Chancellor, DIAT, Pune on final report submitted by Sh Vijay Deshmukh, Chairman, Enquiry Committee.
Note: – above required information is directly related to corruption and not come under schedule – II
Find the application fee for the request attached with this application. If you feel that above requested information does not pertain to your department then please follow the provisions of Section 6(3) of the RTI act 2005. Also as per the provision of the RTI Act 2005 please provide the details (Name and Designation) of the first appellate authority w.r.t. to your department with the reply to above request, where I may require file first appeal.
I do hereby declare that I am the citizen of India. Kindly provide me with the information at the address mentioned with the application. I request you to ensure that the information is provided before expiry of 30 day period after you have received the application.
To, 29th June 2013Shri. Sameer Kumar Khare,Joint Secretary (Estt.) and Public Grievances & CVO,Ministry of Defence, of India,97, South Block, New Delhi -110 105.
Subject: Request to investigate the complaint against Dr A K Tyagi, CPIO, DRDO Hqrs Scientist’F’,DRDO, Ministry of Defence.
Reference: Vide CVC letter No 011/DEF/018-121962 date 17/03/2011 complaint forwarded to CVO, Ministry of Defence, South Block.
Sir,
A complaint sent to CVC against Dr A K Tyagi, CPIO, DRDO Hqrs Scientist’F’, DRDO, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi on 10th Nov 2010, Copy enclosed for your ready reference.
The CVC registered the case vide complain no 569/11/9 and further sent to CVO, Ministry of Defence, South Block vide CVC letter No 011/DEF/018-121962 date 15/03/2011(Copy enclosed)
Further in between I have sent an RTI request to DIAT, DRDO, Pune to get more input on the subject matter. (Copy enclosed)
I have received information that was enough to prove the irregularities in procurement and payment to vendors. (Copy enclosed)
Further Mr. Rajiv Chauhan, Advocate filed one more RTI and requested the details, after CIC intervention DIAT, DRDO provide the some documents for inspection related to procurement of online magazine costing around 22 lakhs plus. Copy of RTI and related information which we received from DIAT DRDO are enclosed herewith as evidences.
DRDO’s procurement practices are the most illogical and in the name secrecy DRDO is fooling the whole nation and in this act CDA is also equally responsible, in some cases knowingly, or in some cases unknowingly, because in the name of technology DRDO scientists are easily able to fool them.
This is a very small case of few lakhs or nearly 1.5 crores but it will show you the mechanism of how DRDO scientists are making money and fooling the system.
The ink signed order copy is not available in the department and the payment of more than 22 lakhs was done.
Like online ‘Nature Magazine” subscription available online, all the procurement papers i.e. order copy and other related papers in files are scanned papers.
Main questions in Dr. A K Tyagi case
1. Where is the ink-signed order copy of Online Nature Magazine? 2. Without ink signed order copy of Online Nature Magazine, how JCDA, Pune released the payments? 3. Are any records in DIAT, Library available which can show how many persons logged with Online Nature Magazine? 4. The observations of DIAT, DRDO enquiry committee against Dr. A K Tyagi still unanswered?
i. To understand the existing procedure for procurement of Books by Library, it was necessary to go through basis of existing procedure, record and files to related to procurement. In absence of OI/C,IC&L very limited records made available by Library and after arrival of OI/C,IC&L access to information and records was totally denied to the Board of Officers. ii. Existing Procedure and Anomalies- the following is observed by Board of Officers.
i) OI/C,IC&L places demand directly to vendors after approval by Library Committee. There is no procedure of quotation/negotiation followed. it is noted that as per terms and conditions no discounts have been asked.
ii) Order has been placed on single tender basis
iii. During limited observations it was seen that Books were accepted at higher prices than the order/approval price by the purchase committee. iv. No proof of price is being put up to the purchase Committee for approval. v. Firm Orders are being placed by OI/C,IC&L without bidding/negotiation vi. Vendors to whom orders are being placed are not registered. As per purchase procedure orders of only up to Rs 5000/- can be placed to unregistered vendors. This rule is not followed. vii. In our limited inquiry, we observed that large numbers of books were viii. Accepted at much higher price. We site few example-
a) Book ordered for Rs 6029.07 was procured for price Rs 81,936.00
b) Book ordered for Rs 13,156.00 was procured for price Rs 27,362.68
c) Book ordered for Rs 40,000.00 was procured for price Rs 3,60,00.00
d) Book ordered for Rs 3,292.24 was procured for price Rs 5,233.09
ix. We did not find any justification in orders or Terms & Conditions to accept such high billing prices for payment to vendors. x. OI/C,IC&L did not conduct independent investigation regarding over valued books supplied by the vendors for their correct price. xi. We found such number of cases where over payment was cleaned by OI/C, IC&L and Finance Officer without amendment or without bringing to notice of approving authority or VC xii. We did not find any power vested to OI/C,IC&L, Finance Officer to clear the over payment cases. xiii. Before payment to vendors, pre-auditing is mandatory (as per purchase procedure) No such pre auditing mechanism is found resulting in escaping the over payment cases from scrutiny and corrective action. We did not find any document or authority to exempt from pre –auditing. xiv. Functioning of Library in case Library procurement was found devoid of adequate check and balance and control mechanism. We can conclude that OI/C,IC&L and Finance Officer flouted the principle of FR-21
5. Who is saving the culprit?
As we are aware that now some cases of DRDO were taken up seriously with efforts, like Dr. Arun Kumar, Dr. S M Veerabhadrappa, etc.
We hope that you will take this matter seriously and personally because it was pending since 15/03/2011 in CVO, Ministry of Defence.
Copy of complaint sent to CVC against Dr A K Tyagi
Copy of CVC letter dated 15/03/2011
Copy of CVC Letter dated 17/03/2011
Copy of RTI to DIAT, DRDO, Pune
Copy of Reply of DIAT, DRDO, Pune
Copy of RTI request of Dr Rajiv Chauhan & CIC decision
Copy of procurement papers received during inspection at DIAT, DRDO, Pune
Copy of complaint sent to CVC against Dr A K Tyagi
Date -10th Nov 2010
To
The Chief Vigilance Commissioner
Satarkata Bhavan A-Block GPO Complex INA
New delhi : 110023
Complaint is being lodged against
Name – Dr.A K Tyagi, Tele 23007453
Designation- DRDO – Scientist ‘F’, CPIO, Head, RTI Cell, 314 A, DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg, New Delhi – 110105
Dr. A.K.Tyagi, Scientist ‘F’, Head, RTI Cell, DRDO previously posted in Defence Institute of Advanced Technology, (DIAT), Deemed University. Defence Institute of Advanced (Deemed University) is a premier academic institute functioning under the aegis of Defence Research & Development Organization
Dr. A.K.Tyagi worked in DIAT as O I/C(Officer In-Charge), IC&L(Information Center & Library) and Finance Officer during his posting.
He has violated the all procurement norms laid by DRDO authority vide there Revised Edition 1999, DRDO manual of Procedure for Management of Library & Technical Information Centers. – DRDO Hqrs, Ministry of Defence.
Page No – 25 Para 4.2.3 No 4 Terms for procurement of books
Page No – 33 Para 4.3.4 Terms for procurement of periodical publication
Above procedure were violated by Dr A.K Tyagi in his all procurements and misappropriate the government funds and misinterpreted the government rules for minting money for himself and as well as for his god fathers.
The book purchase in DRDO the approval of library committee is obtain which selects the useful book/journals and then the normal purchasing procedure is followed the quotations are called and the lowest bidder gets the order.
There are few publisher are whose books/journals have standard price and when order is placed it goes directly to publisher.
In Dr A K Tyagi cases most of orders were placed to local vendors in single tender basis. When the purchases of books by violating the all the rules Dr A K Tyagi surpassed the all the records and the budget limit was crossed five times( 30 Laks to 1.5 Corers). This action was noticed by all the DIAT officials and an inquiry committee was framed. The committee constituted by then Vice Chancellor a senior officer as chairman and two officer as board member,. When the committee starts the investigation most of the documents were denied by Dr A K Tyagi, somehow, the inquiry committee submitted its report. The amount of corruption was good enough to punish the official but as usual God father culture prevailing in DRDO helped him and gave him safe passage by transferring to DRDO Hqrs.
The God Father guide him to commit the corrupt practice and got protected by none other than Dr W Selvamurthy, CC R&D,DRDO.
With his blessing he purchased Nature journal, nature publishing group, 4 Crinan Street, London, United Kingdom via local vendor for Rs 25 Lakhs
Facts: Till date nobody from DIAT has seen the Nature Journal
The chairman for the Nature Journal procurement was Vigilance Officer of DIAT who approved this procurement from local vendor.
In other cases the books/journals orders were recommended in dollars but Dr.A K Tyagi made payment in Pounds/Euro for the same procurement and bill was raised by with the help local vendors. Example – if book cost was approved by library committee in $ 360but when the payment was done that is 360 Pounds
The inquiry constituted to address this issue inspire of giving punishment the God Father Dr W Selvamurthy, CC R&D,DRDO than CC (HR) gave him safe passage and now DRDO Hqrs made him CPIO,DRDO Hqrs, Head RTI Cell and the best part of this
DRDO is exempted from RTI Act 2005 of Schedule-II only corruption & human right RTI entertained by DRDO so one can imagine the DRDO find most suitable corrupt official for the handling of RTI issues.
The finding of inquiry committee of DIAT (Board of Three Senior Officers)
1.Observations – To understand the existing procedure for procurement of Books by Library, it was necessary to go through basis of existing procedure, record and files to related to procurement. In absence of OI/C,IC&L very limited records made available by Library and after arrival of OI/C,IC&L access to information and records was totally denied to the Board of Officers.
2.Existing Procedure and Anomalies- the following is observed by Board of Officers.
i)OI/C,IC&L places demand directly to vendors after approval by Library Committee. There is no procedure of quotation/negotiation followed. it is noted that as per terms and conditions no discounts have been asked.
ii)Order has been placed on single tender basis
iii)During limited observations it was seen that Books were accepted at higher prices than the order/approval price by the purchase committee.
iv)No proof of price is being put up to the purchase Committee for approval.
v)Firm Orders are being placed by OI/C,IC&L without bidding/negotiation
vi)Vendors to whom orders are being placed are not registered. As per purchase procedure orders of only up to Rs 5000/- can be placed to unregistered vendors. This rule is not followed.
vii)In our limited inquiry, we observed that large numbers of books were
accepted at much higher price. We site few example-
a) Book ordered for Rs 6029.07 was procured for price Rs 81,936.00
b) Book ordered for Rs 13,156.00 was procured for price Rs 27,362.68
c) Book ordered for Rs 40,000.00 was procured for price Rs 3,60,00.00
d) Book ordered for Rs 3,292.24 was procured for price Rs 5,233.09
viii)We did not find any justification in orders or Terms & Conditions to accept such high billing prices for payment to venors.
ix)OI/C,IC&L did not conduct independent investigation regarding over valued books supplied by the vendors for their correct price.
x)We found such number of cases where over payment was cleaned by OI/C, IC&L and Finance Officer without amendment or without bringing to notice of approving authority or VC
xi) We did not find any power vested to OI/C,IC&L, Finance Officer to clear the over payment cases.
xii) Before payment to vendors, pre-auditing is mandatory (as per purchase procedure) No such pre auditing mechanism is found resulting in escaping the over payment cases from scrutiny and corrective action. We did not find any document or authority to exempt from pre –auditing.
xiii) Functioning of Library in case Library procurement was found devoid of adequate check and balance and control mechanism. We can conclude that OI/C,IC&L and Finance Officer flouted the principle of FR-21
Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal21-Sunderwala, RaipurDehradun-248008UttarakhandCell No- 9411114879, Landline- 0135-2787750e-mail-prabhu@dandriyal.comCopy of CVC letter dated 15/03/2011CVC letter dated 15/03/2011
Copy of CVC letter dated 17/03/2011
CVC letter dated 17/03/2011
Copy of RTI to DIAT, DRDO, Pune
To Date 15th February 2011 The CPIO No RTI/DIAT/HARASS/14/2/2011 Defence Institute of Armment Technology (DIAT) Simhagad Road, Girinagar Pune-411 025
Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005. In respect of online subscription of Nature magazine by DIAT, Pune
The copy of order of online subscription for NATURE magazine. With terms & condition
The copy of demand initiative for Nature magazine if any.
Copy of recommendation if any by approval committee of library.
Copy of renewal of subscription if any
Present status of subscription.
Note: – above required information is directly related to corruption and not come under schedule – II
Find the application fee for the request attached with this application. If you feel that above requested information does not pertain to your department then please follow the provisions of Section 6(3) of the RTI act 2005. Also as per the provision of the RTI Act 2005 please provide the details (Name and Designation) of the first appellate authority w.r.t. to your department with the reply to above request, where I may require file first appeal.
I do hereby declare that I am the citizen of India. Kindly provide me with the information at the address mentioned with the application. I request you to ensure that the information is provided before expiry of 30 day period after you have received the application.
Enclosed – Rs 10 Postal Order No 60E 172113
Regards
Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal
21-Sunderwala, Raipur
Dehradun-248008
Phone – 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,
e-mail id prabhu@dandriyal.com
website – www.corruptionindrdo.com Copy of Reply of DIAT, DRDO, PuneDIAT, DRDO, Pune Reply page1DIAT,DRDO,Pune RTI Reply page 2
Copy of RTI request of Dr Rajiv Chauhan & CIC decision
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 308, B-Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066
File No.CIC/LS/A/2012/001219
Appellant Shri Rajiv Chauhan Public Authority DRDO Date of hearing 09.08.2012 Date of decision 09.08.2012
Facts :-
1. Heard today dated 09.08.2012. Appellant present. DRDO is represented by Shri
Deepak Mishra, Scientist ‘E’
2. The appellant had filed an RTI application dated 29.10.2011 seeking information
about the purchase of certain books and other materials by the Defence Institute of Armament Technology, Pune. This information was denied to him on the ground that DRDO is an exempted organisation. During the hearing, the appellant submits that he will be satisfied if he is given inspection of the file/files relating to the order placed by Dr. A.K. Tyagi, the then Library Incharge, DIAT, Pune, for online subscription of ‘Nature Magzine’ against payment of about Rs. 25 lacs
3. The appellant also produces a copy of the letter dated 14.3.2011 of Dr. S.S.Sirurmath, University Librarian, in which he had informed the appellant that copy of order and terms and conditions of Nature Magazine(on line) were not available. He expresses surprise at this response in as much as an order of Rs. 25 lacs could not have been placed without due processing in the file.
4. In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is hereby ordered that CPIO may give inspection of all records relating to the online subscription to the appellant or his representative in 05 weeks time.
Sd/- ( M.L. Sharma ) Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against
application and payment of the charges, prescribed under the Act, to the CPIO of this
Commission.
( K.L. Das ) Deputy Registrar
Address of parties :- 1. The Scientist ‘F’ & CPIO, DRDO, RTI Cell, 314-A, B-Block, DRDO Bhawan, New Delhi-110105.
2.2 Full Address: 314-A, “B’ BLOCK, DRDO BHAWAN, NEW DELHI-110105
2.3 Name of Public Authority: DRDO, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE.
IMPORTANT NOTE :-
The RTI information is related with the corruption of the CPIO of RTI Dr.A.K.TYAGI during the office-in charge ,information centre/ library & finance officer of DIAT (Defense institute of Advanced technology). So that the decision on my RTI decision given by- Deepak Mishra , Addl.Director, RTI Cell, DRDO BHAWAN , NEW DELHI-110105
3. Details of First Appellate Authority [FAA]:
3.1 Name/Designation of the FAA: Dr. ARUN KUMAR
3.2 Full Address of FAA: OS & DIRECTOR; DIRECTORATE OF PERSONNEL;
ROOM NO- 217, DRDO BHAWAN, NEW DELHI-110105
4. Dates of RTI application/first appeal:
4.1 To CPIO — 29 OCT 2011
4.2 To FAA: — 02 DEC 2011
5. Particulars of Decisions:
5.1 Reference No & Date of CPIO Decision:-
22nd NOV2011; RTI/01/2091/P/2011/0283; CPIO.DRDO HQ; NEW DELHI
6. Dates of receipt of replies by appellant from:-
6.1 CPIO— 28 NOV2011
6.2 FAA: — 17 JAN 2012
7. Details of information sought:-
Kindly inform to you that Dr.A.K.Tyagi worked in DIAT (Defense Institute of Advanced Technology) as OI(office in charge),IC&L(Information centre & library) and Finance officer during his posting. Presently the CPIO at DRDO HQ, New Delhi. He has violated all procurement norms laid by DRDO authority vide there revised edition 1999,DRDO manual of Procedure for management of library & Technical Information Centers.-DRDO HQ, Ministry of Defense .Page no-25 para 4.2.3 no 4 terms for procurement of books; page no-33 para 4.3.4 terms for procurement of periodical publication. Above procedure were violated by Dr A.K Tyagi in his all procurements and misappropriate the government funds and misinterpreted the government rules for minting money for himself .The book purchase in DRDO the approval of library committee is obtain which selects the useful book/journals and then the normal purchasing procedure is followed the quotations are called and the lowest bidder gets the order. There are few publisher are whose books/journals have standard price and when order is placed it goes directly to publisher.
In Dr A K Tyagi cases most of orders were placed to local vendors in single tender basis. When the purchases of books by violating the all the rules Dr A K Tyagi surpassed the all the records and the budget limit was crossed five times( 30 Laks to 1.5 Corers). This action was noticed by all the DIAT officials and an inquiry committee was framed. The committee constituted by then Vice Chancellor a senior officer as chairman and two officer as board member,. When the committee starts the investigation most of the documents were denied by Dr A K Tyagi, somehow, the inquiry committee submitted its report. The amount of corruption was good enough to punish the official but as usual God father culture prevailing in DRDO helped him and gave him safe passage by transferring to DRDO Hqrs.
He purchased Nature journal, nature publishing group, 4 Crinan Street, London, United Kingdom via local vendor for Rs 25 Lakhs
Facts : Till date nobody from DIAT has seen the Nature Journal
This journal was not useful for DIAT as the same deals with life sciences and DIAT area is ARMAMENT ENGINEERING, APPLIED MATHEMATICS, METALLURGY, COMPUTER ENGINEERING, APPLIED PHYSICS, AEROSPACE ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL ENGINEERING, EXPLOSIVES & APPLIED CHEMISTRY, ELECTRONICS The chairman for the Nature Journal procurement was Vigilance Officer of DIAT who approved this procurement from local vendor.
In other cases the books/journals orders were recommended in dollars but Dr.A K Tyagi made payment in Pounds/Euro for the same procurement and bill was raised by with the help local vendors. Example – if book cost was approved by library committee in $ 360 but when the payment was done that is 360 Pounds
The finding of inquiry committee of DIAT (Board of Three Senior Officers)
1. Observations – To understand the existing procedure for procurement of Books by Library, it was necessary to go through basis of existing procedure, record and files to related to procurement. In absence of OI/C,IC&L very limited records made available by Library and after arrival of OI/C,IC&L access to information and records was totally denied to the Board of Officers. 2. Existing Procedure and Anomalies- the following is observed by Board of Officers. i) OI/C,IC&L places demand directly to vendors after approval by Library Committee. There is no procedure of quotation/negotiation followed. it is noted that as per terms and conditions no discounts have been asked. ii) Order has been placed on single tender basis iii) During limited observations it was seen that Books were accepted at higher prices than the order/approval price by the purchase committee. iv) No proof of price is being put up to the purchase Committee for approval. v) Firm Orders are being placed by OI/C,IC&L without bidding/negotiation vi) Vendors to whom orders are being placed are not registered. As per purchase procedure orders of only up to Rs 5000/- can be placed to unregistered vendors. This rule is not followed. vii) In our limited inquiry, we observed that large numbers of books were accepted at much higher price. We site few example- a) Book ordered for Rs 6029.07 was procured for price Rs 81,936.00 b) Book ordered for Rs 13,156.00 was procured for price Rs 27,362.68 c) Book ordered for Rs 40,000.00 was procured for price Rs 3,60,00.00 d) Book ordered for Rs 3,292.24 was procured for price Rs 5,233.09 viii) We did not find any justification in orders or Terms & Conditions to accept such high billing prices for payment to venors. ix) OI/C,IC&L did not conduct independent investigation regarding over valued books supplied by the vendors for their correct price. x) We found such number of cases where over payment was cleaned by OI/C, IC&L and Finance Officer without amendment or without bringing to notice of approving authority or VC xi) We did not find any power vested to OI/C,IC&L, Finance Officer to clear the over payment cases. xii) Before payment to vendors, pre-auditing is mandatory (as per purchase procedure) No such pre auditing mechanism is found resulting in escaping the over payment cases from scrutiny and corrective action. We did not find any document or authority to exempt from pre –auditing. xiii) Functioning of Library in case Library procurement was found devoid of adequate check and balance and control mechanism. We can conclude that OI/C,IC&L and Finance Officer flouted the principle of FR-21
This is a case of the corruption so that the main object to take this information is to provide as an evidence before high power investigating officer / commission / higher courts in the interest of law and justice .
I want the following information’s as under-
S.No INFORMATION SOUGHT REPLY
1. Is it true that Dr. A.K.Tyagi worked in DIAT (Defense Institute of Advanced Technology) as OI(office in charge),IC&L(Information centre & library) and Finance officer during his posting. Presently the CPIO at DRDO HQ, New Delhi ?
Yes/No
2. Dr A K Tyagi OI/C,IC&L places demand directly to vendors after approval by Library Committee. There is no procedure of quotation / negotiation followed ? Yes/No
3. Dr A K Tyagi OI/C,IC&L has been placed orders on single tender basis? Yes/No
4. Vendors to whom orders are being placed are not
registered?
Yes/ No
5. Book cost was approved by library committee in US dollor 360 but when the payment was done that is 360 Pounds ?
Yes/No
6. Order copy and term, conditions for the nature Magazine is not available. So the order place by Dr. A.K.Tyagi for Nature Magazine verbally or in written? Pl. provide suitable reply with authentic documents.
I state that the information sought does not fall within the restriction in section 8 & 9 of the Act and to the best of my knowledge it pertains in the DRDO office contained & record. Above required information is directly related to corruption and not come under scheduled –II. I request to you please provide me the information by the speed post.
8. Brief facts of the case:-
I submitted my RTI application before the CPIO, DRDO, New Delhi on dt.29-10-2011. Cause for put up this application was the allegation of the corruption / misuse of the office by Dr.A.K.Tyagi . He violated all procurement norms laid by DRDO authority vide there revised edition 1999,DRDO manual of Procedure for management of library & Technical Information Centers.-DRDO HQ, Ministry of Defense .Page no-25 para 4.2.3 no 4 terms for procurement of books; page no-33 para 4.3.4 terms for procurement of periodical publication. Above procedure were violated by Dr A.K Tyagi in his all procurements and misappropriate the government funds and misinterpreted the government rules for minting money for himself .The book purchase in DRDO the approval of library committee is obtain which selects the useful book/journals and then the normal purchasing procedure is followed the quotations are called and the lowest bidder gets the order. There are few publisher are whose books/journals have standard price and when order is placed it goes directly to publisher. In Dr A K Tyagi cases most of orders were placed to local vendors in single tender basis. When the purchases of books by violating the all the rules Dr A K Tyagi surpassed the all the records and the budget limit was crossed five times( 30 Laks to 1.5 Corers). This action was noticed by all the DIAT officials and an inquiry committee was framed. The committee constituted by then Vice Chancellor a senior officer as chairman and two officer as board member,. When the committee starts the investigation most of the documents were denied by Dr A K Tyagi, somehow, the inquiry committee submitted its report. The amount of corruption was good enough to punish the official but as usual God father culture prevailing in DRDO helped him and gave him safe passage by transferring to DRDO Hqrs. He purchased Nature journal, nature publishing group, 4 Crinan Street, London, United Kingdom via local vendor for Rs 25 Lakhs
CPIO reply is not satisfactory and not as per the law because the RTI is related with the allegation of the corruption and not exempted under section 24(1) of the RTI Act-2005.
In Supreme Court civil Appeal no – 6454 clearly mentioned that- “37. The right to information is a cherished right. Information and right to information are intended to be formidable tools in the hands of responsible citizens to fight corruption and to bring in transparency and accountability.
The provisions of RTI Act should be enforced strictly and all efforts should be made to bring to light the necessary information under clause (b) of section 4(1) of the Act which relates to securing transparency and accountability in the working of public authorities and in discouraging corruption.”
I was not satisfied with the reply of CPIO,DRDO HQ, New Delhi, after that I submitted an appeal before FAA to take the information but the FAA of DRDO dismissed the appeal and failed to provide the information with the ref. of second schedule of the RTI Act & section 24(1) of the RTI Act-2005.
9. Reasons/grounds for this appeal:-
1- That the RTI application is related with the public information because the tenders generally published in news paper / internet for the purchasing of the books as per the DRDO manual of Procedure for management of library & Technical Information Centers.-DRDO HQ, Ministry of Defense .Page no-25 para 4.2.3 no 4 terms for procurement of books; page no-33 para 4.3.4 terms for procurement of periodical publication.
2- That this information is directly related with the corruption and misuse of the office and not come under section 24(1) of the RTI Act because the books/journals orders were recommended in dollars but Dr.A K Tyagi made payment in Pounds/Euro for the same procurement and bill was raised by with the help local vendors. Example – if book cost was approved by library committee in $ 360but when the payment was done that is 360 Pounds
3- In Dr A K Tyagi cases most of orders were placed to local vendors in single tender basis. When the purchases of books by violating the all the rules Dr A K Tyagi surpassed the all the records and the budget limit was crossed five times( 30 Laks to 1.5 Corers). This action was noticed by all the DIAT officials and an inquiry committee was framed. The committee constituted by then Vice Chancellor a senior officer as chairman and two officer as board member,. When the committee starts the investigation most of the documents were denied by Dr A K Tyagi, somehow, the inquiry committee submitted its report. The amount of corruption was good enough to punish the official but as usual God father culture prevailing in DRDO helped him and gave him safe passage by transferring to DRDO Hqrs.
4- That the main object to take this information is to provide as an evidence before High Power Investigating Officer/ Commissions / High Courts in the interest of law and justice.
10. Any other information in support of appeal:-
1- This RTI information is required to proof a corruption during the purchasing of the books / periodical publication.
2- Dr.A.K.Tyagi violated all procurement norms laid by DRDO authority vide there revised edition 1999,DRDO manual of Procedure for management of library & Technical Information Centers.-DRDO HQ, Ministry of Defense .Page no-25 para 4.2.3 no 4 terms for procurement of books; page no-33 para 4.3.4 terms for procurement of periodical publication. Above procedure were violated by Dr A.K Tyagi in his all procurements and misappropriate the government funds and misinterpreted the government rules for minting money for himself.
3- That this action was noticed by all the DIAT officials and an inquiry committee was framed. This committee was put up an adverse report to the authorities.
11. Prayer/relief sought for:-
I request your honor to pass an order to concern authority to provide the following information’s as under-
S.No INFORMATION SOUGHT REPLY
1. Is it true that Dr. A.K.Tyagi worked in DIAT (Defense Institute of Advanced Technology) as OI(office in charge),IC&L(Information centre & library) and Finance officer during his posting. Presently the CPIO at DRDO HQ, New Delhi ?
Yes/No
2. Dr A K Tyagi OI/C,IC&L places demand directly to vendors after approval by Library Committee. There is no procedure of quotation / negotiation followed ? Yes/No
3. Dr A K Tyagi OI/C,IC&L has been placed orders on single tender basis? Yes/No
4. Vendors to whom orders are being placed are not
registered?
Yes/ No
5. Book cost was approved by library committee in US dollor 360 but when the payment was done that is 360 Pounds ?
Yes/No
6. Order copy and term, conditions for the nature Magazine is not available. So the order place by Dr. A.K.Tyagi for Nature Magazine verbally or in written? Pl. provide suitable reply with authentic documents.
I state that the information sought does not fall within the restriction in section 8 & 9 of the Act and to the best of my knowledge it pertains in the DRDO office contained & record. Above required information is directly related to corruption and not come under scheduled –II. I request your honor to pass an order to concern authority to provide the information’s by the speed post.
(2)- I request your honor to pass an order in favor of the applicant as deemed fit as an any relief .
Personal Presence at hearing:- — YES
Declaration:-
I hereby state that the information and particulars given above are true to the best of my knowledge and belief. I also declare that this matter is not previously filed with this commission nor is pending with any Court or tribunal or authority.
Place: MEERUT
Date: —————-
Signature of appellant
Copy of procurement papers received during inspection at DIAT, DRDO, Pune
To 27th March 2013
The Defence Minister
Room No -104, South Block
New Delhi – 110011
Happy Holi, Holi Mubark to honorable Raksha Mantri Ji,
Happy Holi, Holi Mubark to each and every true Indian who thinks for the country and dreams of self-reliance, secure, healthy and honest India including our defence sector.
In the Holika Dhahan occasion we congratulate and support our honest Defence Minister Sh A.K. Antony for starting swaha of corrupt officials in our defence sector. We are also thankful to him for taking such exemplary action (suspension just half an hour before his retirement after enjoying extension in service for two years) against Dr. Arun Kumar, Ex-DOP, DRDO.
Sir, there are so many other corrupt DRDO senior officials who deserve the same action from your side. These officers exploit DRDO by inducting incompetent family members in different levels, involving procurement businesses as the name of ex- air chief name is accused. If DRDO is investigated, you will find that SPIC, ASL, DRDL, HEMRL, GTRE, TBRL and lots of other DRDO labs are busy in the same manner. We have already shared some information with IB, CBI and other agencies. The family members, relatives and friends of these corrupt DRDO officials are enjoying shares of DRDO funds.
There are many more secrets of incompetent DRDO officers mishandling constitutional valid rules for their wasted interest.
RAC of DRDO established to accelerate the recruitment process of potential scientists. However, unfortunately RAC is losing its utility and working as it is now a tool for corrupt senior DRDO officials to encourage corrupt and incompetent stuff in DRDO and it is also being used for demoralizing the honest and real R&D scientists. The increasing representations and court cases are the live examples of these acts. We think that by now, you are also fed up by answering a lot of honorable parliament members, who are regularly asking the exodus of DRDO scientists.
Recently, as per sources, in one court case, a scientist accused that the thenRACChairman Dr. P.S. Goel unconstitutionally cleared screening committee’s list. The claim is that the list was not signed by the members. It is not surprising because Dr. P.S. Goel has already violated Article 309 by issuing a letter for modifying the SRO on his own without approval of cabinet vide letter no.RAC/01/Assessment/PSG dated 27, March 2011. This was blindly done to give benefits to some incompetent DRDO officials out of way; in return, Dr. P.S. Goel got DRDO chair which costs nearly Rs. 83 lakhs per year on the poor tax payer.
Dr. R.C. Aggarwal, Director DEAL, DRDO gave unceremonious favor to another Agarwal, a scientist of his lab for the post, outstanding scientist. This outstanding scientist had been claimed that“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.” We are waiting for RTI reply on this subject from DRDO, but we know personally this claim is totally false and used to make him an outstanding scientist.
Another great job was done by DRDO when DRDO ignored your power delegation orders No 36(3)/ 2009-D(O&M), Govt. of India, Min of Def, dated 1 June 2009 and No 36(3)/2012-D(O&M), Govt. of India, Min of Def, dated 5 Nov 2012. . DRDO took approval to suspension/dismissal of honest officials from RRM and in this respect they also filed affidavit in the honorable courts that they got approval from RRM on the subject matter.
Sir this is the tip of the iceberg and the main reason of the exodus, court cases and unproductiveness of DRDO.
Sir, in the DRDO scenario a lot of evil things are waiting for your Holika Dhahan like
Arun Kumar’s daughter’s illegal appointment.
Selwamurthy’s daughter’s illegal appointment.
T.Chandrabanu’s illegal appointment
Prof S K Salwan’s , illegally given DRDO chair (ignored the age limit)
Vasudev’s illegal stay and involvement in SPIC (the IB already reported his daughter’s involvement)
Dr Prahlada ’s VC, DIAT appointment (ignored his all corrupt activities including remark for SC candidate)
DLRL security surveillance procurement which was submitted with evidences to you only an eyewash inquiry was done by DRDO officials)
Appointment of Sh Dharmendra Kumar, Scientist ‘B’ helped by Dr Arun Kumar, He was MSc,(2001) at the time of joining in DRDO as STA (2003)
List is too long and the paper will fall short but we are assured that you will surely swaha some corrupt officials in this holy holi festival.
To
The Defence Minister
Room No -104, South Block
New Delhi – 110011
Reference: a) Your letter No 1409-VIP/RM/2011 dated 21st March 2011 b) Your letter No 1409-VIP/RM/2236 dated 20th May 2011
Honorable Sir,
The following news was published on Friday, 13th January 2012 Times of India, New Delhi.
‘AMU VC committed financial impropriety’: CBI is believed to have found that AMU VC P K Abdul Azis had committed financial impropriety and knowingly claimed allowances for which he was not entitled.
Sir, Dr Prahlada, VC, DIAT, DRDO has also did same corruption and the RTI reply from JCDA and DRDO Hqrs proved the same then why the similar action is not taken by Ministry of Defence ?
Dr. Prahlada is not only case in DRDO there are so many other senior officials who have committed similar corruption until my RTI was raised. Like Sh S Ravi, Scientist ‘G’, Sh Neeraj Kumar, Scientist ‘D’ etc.
Please find enclosed documentary evidences of above corrupt practices done by DRDO officials for your needful action.
RTI Reply of DRDO Hqrs in respect of Dr Prahlada, Sh S Ravi, Scietist’ G’ etc
RTI Reply of DRDO Hqrs in respect of Sh. Neeraj Kumar Scientist ‘ D’
DOP,DRDO Hqrs letter for HRA recovery dated 17thAugust 2011
JCDA RTI ReplyDRDO Hqrs ReplyDRDO Qrs RTI Reply 2DRDO Hqrs RTI reply in respect of Sh Neeraj KumarNeeraj Kumar HRA Amount
Please see the following RTI Reply from DRDO RTI Cell, in which DRDO RTI cell provide wrong and false informations.
RTI request
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005.
Total number of transit accommodation available in DRDO’s guest houses at DELHI.
How many DRDO officials are availing DRDO transit guest house facilities at Delhi for more than 30 days while they are posted in same station i.e. Delhi from 1st Jan 2007 to 31st May 2010
Total number of days Sh. S.Ravi, Additional Director, DRDO Hqrs has been availing the DRDO guest house facilities since his posting to DRDO Hqrs till date.
Total number of days Dr. Prahalda , CCR&D,(Ae &SI),DS, DRDO HQRs has been availing the DRDO guest house facilities since his posting to DRDO Hqrs till date.
Please intimate me date time for inspection of guest house records under Right to Information Act 2005 section 2 (j) (i) & (ii
DRDO Reply _ File No. CIC/LS/A12011/000412
Para wise reply pertaining to years 2009 and 2010 is as under:
(a) Total number of transit accommodation available in DRDO’s guest House at Delhi —105
(b) DRDO officials availing DRDO transit guest house facilities at Delhi for more than 30 days while they are posted in same station — 17
(c) Sh. S Ravi, Additional Director, DRDO HQrs availed DRDO guest house facility in Delhi during 10 Jul 2009 to 10 Sep 2010.
(d) Dr. Prahiada, CC R&D (Ae & SI) & DS, DRDO HQrs availed DRDO guest house facility in Delhi during 26 Mar 2010 to 20 Mar 2011. (False Information by RTI Cell, DRDO)
1. Facts : Dr. Prahalda , CCR&D,(Ae &SI),DS, DRDO HQRs availed the DRDO guest house facilities since his posting to DRDO Hqrs to 20 Mar 2011.
2. The Date of transfer of Sh S Ravi not provided
Brief facts of the case
The DRDO Appellate Authority Dr. Prahlada, CC R&D (Ae & SI) & DS have not given his residence address and contact details in any documents or website or any other public domain. I think he is staying in DRDO Bhawan itself. The CPIO and FAA of DRDO Hqrs both are on their posting at DRDO Hqrs, staying in DRDO Guest House and drawing the HRA. So how can Indian citizen expect any right information from these corrupt officials?
There more 9-10 CC R&D and Directors who are belongs to Hyderabad and Bangalore and their families are staying Hyderabad and Bangalore respectively and they all are staying in DRDO guest houses they are giving their residence address in telephone directory at DRDO guest houses and enjoying HRA also. They are frequent fliers, they all are already break the Milkha Singh ‘s (Flying Sikh of India) records and relishing without fear with TD with poor tax payers money.
Following DRDO senior official are staying in guest house since their positing to DRDO Hqrs and drawing the 30% HRA . it is big money and two major points i.e. one -these guest house not meant for permanent residence and second when the official come from various station to attend the meeting these guest house are not available for them and they have to spent precious poor tax payers money in luxury hotels.
There are more than 15 room is permanently occupied by DRDO senior officials in C-7, DRDO Guest House, Qutab Enclave, &6 official also unauthorized /occupied the DRDO Guest Development Enclave Rao, Tularam Marg, because as per sanction both places are as DRDO guest house facility in Govt .of India’s records. This is the purely dadagiri of DRDO.
Following DRDO senior official are staying in guest house as DRDO telephone Directory
Name of Official Office Ph No. Residence Ph No Residence Address
To
The Defence Minister
Room No -104, South Block
New Delhi – 110011
Reference: a) Your letter No 1409-VIP/RM/2011 dated 21st March 2011
b) Your letter No 1409-VIP/RM/2236 dated 20th May 2011
Honorable Sir,
As the chancellor of DIAT, Pune you have taken the decision to remove Dr. L M Patnaik but have decided to place Dr Prahlada who is yet another big corrupt DRDO official. Sources reveal that yesterday Fax order’s saying Dr L M Patnaik was terminated; it shows the situation (discipline) of high profile deemed Defence University.
The selection of Vice Chancellor for DIAT is not done in accordance with the guidelines of Government of India, which is laid down for such prestigious appointments. Please refer the Gazette Notification No 146, Part-II, Section-4 –
The Universities are Independent bodies and the university Vice Chancellor is the leader of an institution of higher education. According to the standard he / she must be a noted scholar (Dr.Parhalada rules to accomplish this?), who is responsible and excellent (Dr.Parhalada meet these criteria?), as well as the person who has high moral. (Who once said to an SC DRDO Scientist “you people are not born for higher studies”). Sir, you are very well aware of this incident of DRDO’s M Tech selection board. http://bit.ly/p20SwG
He was posted as CC (R&D) in DRDO Headquarters in November 2005 and since then he was staying at C – 7 Guest House. JCDA, R&D reveled in RTI response that he is drawing HRA as well. He has also attracted disciplinary action as in the CCS (CC & A) 1965 rules of action against Dr. Prahlada. Why not take steps to DRDO pending lawsuit against Dr. Prahlada. (RTI Enclosed for your ready reference)
The working of DRDO is now in full swing corruption and nepotism. In Vice Chancellor for DIAT advertisement it was put on Internal Intranet DRONA of DRDO. It is 100% violation of recruitment rules for such higher post and the best part of this out of 7356 so called best scientists, only the most corrupt official was chosen. No patents, no international publications, no academic excellence was considered in the case of Vice Chancellor for DIAT.
Sir, your image in the country is one of most honest persons and recently UPA Chairman; Smt. Sonia Gandhi had also shown her faith on you by delegating powers in absence of her. But in the cases of DRDO it is not understandable that why you are taking such lenient steps by allowing these corrupt scientists of DRDO to thrive in spite of receiving all the evidences against them. You simply believe that constituting a committee is the only way to handle the situation.
i) The case of DLRL the complete documentary evidences are being submitted for your kind consideration. What happened to your letter I received in the following context — http://bit.ly/phH6vR
A committee constituted – Ms Shobha Verma, Addl Director, Mr Sashtri, Director Anurag Cell and Sh SL Badnikar, Director GAETEC. They recorded all statements and submitted the report but nothing about corrupt officials of DLRL.
ii) The Case of Sh T Mohan Rao against whom the FIR was registered and he spent one night in jail but next day he got the bail with the help of same lawyer who bailed out the supplier of GTRE Sh VN Narayan, representative of ILN Technologies. The question was raised by Honorable Member of Parliament Sh Navtej Singh Siddhu on 8th August 2011 but Joint Secretary replied that matter is sub judicious, Sh Mohan Rao was only removed from the Directorship of GTRE but has been attached with CEMILAC another Lab of DRDO in Bangalore. Sh T Mohan Rao even not informed his superior about his detonation officially and very next day he went to GTRE and made another Identity card from the security, as his mobile and identity card were seized by the police during interrogation. It is difficult to digest that such a high profile man enjoying extension of service without work and on the other side you only announced the removal in Commodore Sukhjinder Singh for Admiral Gorshkov similar case. Why so soft corners for DRDO corrupt officials? http://bit.ly/p8m6Vahttp://bit.ly/qYJOzq
iii) The case of Dr S K Vasudeva, working in contract in SPIC DRDO where plenty of unaudited funds are looted by corrupt officials, you already verified it with IB. the list of companies which were indulging in SPIC game is so lengthy and you are aware about it through the IB reports. Still the Dr S K Vasudeva is enjoying his status in SPIC while the new Director, Dr Satish Kumar is only puppet. The daughter of Dr S K Vasudeva, Ms Vinita just removed her stuff from the involved company’s premises few days ago. She is the owner of M V Grafix and her role is like Mrs Kanimozi in 2G Scam.
iv) Irregularities being committed by Dr. Arun Kumar, DOP, DRDO Hqrs. in the matter of recruitment of appointment to the post of Scientist ‘B’ ( A Group ‘A’ Gazetted Post in DRDO) http://bit.ly/npjQ8X
An independent inquiry committee has been constituted in DRDO HQ, New Delhi Vide Directorate of Vigilance and Security Note No. DVS/02/2053/P/01 Dated 17Mar. 2011 regarding the acts of corruption committed by Dr. Arun Kumar in getting her daughter Ms. Swati Srivastava as Scientist ‘B’ in response to the advertisement no. 66 item no. 34 meant for stream of Biotechnology. Ms. Swati Srivastava did’t has MSC. in Biotechnology, but she had her MSC in Environmental Biology. The concerned file no. is DRDO/V&S/ INQ- AK/2011. http://bit.ly/pFaMUe
Dr.Arun Kumar also manipulated in DRDO Official records, in the seniority roll of his daughter the information is as follows
Pin No S.No. Name Estt DoB Date of Appt. Education Discipline 2004AB1131 1542 Swati Srivastav DIPAS 23/9/1981 1/7/2009 MSc(BiotTech) Biotechnology
Why are your hands closed for taking any decisions to these most corrupt and anti-national official of DRDO or they are managing any deal like NTRO’s Dr MS Vijayraghwan. http://bit.ly/mRpdU9
Sir, I am requesting you to please take appropriate action to restore the faith in DRDO’s best young talents otherwise they will leave this esteemed organization as more than 1200 scientist have done during the last three years.
To
The Defence Minister
Room No -104, South Block
New Delhi – 110011
Honorable Sir,
I wish to bring to your notice another case of irregularities being committed by Dr. Arun Kumar, DOP, DRDO Hqrs. in the matter of recruitment of appointment to the post of Scientist ‘B’ ( A Group ‘A’ Gazetted Post in DRDO)
Sh. Dharmender Kumar was the Senior Technical Assistant -‘B’ (Non Gazetted Post) in SPIC, DRDO, Delhi. On his selection for appointment to the post of Assistant Professor( Mathemetics) in NDA, Khadakwasla, Pune, he resigned from the post of Senior Technical Assistant -‘B’ , which was accepted by the competent authority and he was relived on 20th December 2010 from SPIC, DRDO, Delhi. He joined the post of Assistant Professor (Mathematics) in NDA, Khadakwasla, Pune on 22nd December 2010.
Sh. Dharmender Kumar on his selection for appointment to the post of Scientist ‘B’ in DRDO through Limited Departmental Competitive Examination for the post of Scientist ‘B’ in DRDO vide DOP, DRDO letter No DOP/05/56002/LDCE 09-20 dated 23th December 2010.
As per clause 2 (h) of terms & condition of offer of appointment letter, Sh. Dharmender Kumar was required to assume the appointment of Scientist ‘B’ within one month from the date of issue of above referred offer letter (23rd December 2010),failing which the offer of appointment will be cancelled( as mentioned in the)
Further, as per terms & condition of offer of appointment issued to the Sh. Dharmender Kumar on 23rd December 2010 i.e. after 3 days of his being SOS from DRDO, and 1 day after joining the NDA, Pune, he was required to undergo a medical test by the prescribed medical board and required essentially to undergo a training course of Scientist ’B’ at DIAT, Pune. Further as per Directorate of Human Resources, DRDO letter No DHRD/17050/DIAT/POINTS16/C/M/1 dated 31st March 2011 that 20 weeks duration mandatory training course for Scientist ’B’ has been scheduled w.e.f 20th April 2010.
Sh. Dharmender Kumar should had not been issued with the letter of offer of appointment to the post of Scientist ‘B’ in DRDO on 23rd December 2010, when he at own resigned and SOS from DRDO on 20th December 2010 and joined NDA, Pune on 22nd December 2010. The post of Scientist ‘B’ against which he was selected was meant out for the departmental candidate of DRDO as such, when he was not entitled to be given the offer of appointment to the post of Scientist ‘B’ in DRDO
When the last date(22nd January 2011) bu assumption of charge of appointment to the post of Scientist ‘B’ in DRDO and joining the mandatory training course in DIAT, Pune by 20th April 2011 has already expired, his request for joining the post of Scientist ‘B’, DRDO should not have been entertained.
Sh. Dharmender Kumar vide his letter dated 3rd February 2011 written directly to Scientific Adviser to RM (and not through proper channel of his office NDA, Pune) requested to extend the period of joining in DRDO as Scientist ‘B’ for a period of 2 months. The extended period of joining time expired on 22nd February 2011.
As per the terms & condition of offer of appointment to the post of Scientist ‘B’ in DRDO as well as under the provision of DRDS Rules 1979 and amendments made thereof, the offer of appointment was required to be cancelled when he has failed to adhere to the terms & condition, a offer of appointment.
From the contents of letter dated 3rd February 2011 of Sh. Dharmender Kumar it is under that he was bypassed the official channel by writing directly to Scientific Adviser to RM, when he has holding the post of Assistant Professor (Mathematics) in NDA, where he was supposed to taught lesson overall discipline, including with regards to correspondence, command & control. He has left DRDO and NDA not for the sake of nation, but consideration (refer to para of his letter 3rd February 2011) both the offer being equally lucrative, more ever; the growth prospect and financial incentive were higher in the said venture. He has send the copy of his letter directly to the DOP, DRDO and not to his earlier controlling authority i.e. SPIC, DRDO
It is highly regretted to say that instead of taking any action against him for the acts of subordination, which are subversive of discipline, and cancelling the offer of appointment to the post of Scientist ‘B’ in DRDO, he has been allowed to join the post of Senior Technical Assistant -‘B’ in SPIC, DRDO on 2nd May 2011 and the very next day i.e. 3rd May 2011 itself the DOP processed his case vigorous speed to evaluate him to join the post of Scientist ‘B’ in DRDO, thus violating the provision of:
a) Terms & Condition of the offer of appointment letter to the post of Scientist ‘B’
b) DRDS Rules 1979
c) Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rule 1964
d) DHRD,DRDO Letter No DHRD/17050/DIAT/POINTS16/C/M/1 dated 31st March 2011
I would like to request you to kindly consider the above facts and ask the Defence Secretary to conduct a thorough inquiry into cases of misuse, abuse and unauthorized use of office and position of DOP,DRDO by Dr Arun Kumar, Scientist ’H’ Outstanding Scientist, DRDO Scientist of the Year Award in the year 2008. So that rule of law is allowed to prevail in the organization in a transparent manner.
We all look forward to your statements “Nurture talent, ensure fairness” “fairness at all levels”, but Sir, DRDO’s honest employees are eagerly waiting for implementing your statements, I ensure on behalf of all DRDO’s honest employees if the day this is implemented, the whole nation will see the great output of DRDO.
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 308, B-Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066
Information Asked Regarding DRDO’s policy for encouraging employees for higher studies
Why I asked this Information – DRDO sends annually many officers for higher studies particulars to IIT’s and national Universities. The admission which granted normally after tough competitions are available to DRDO’s sponsored candidates was easily.
Aim of such higher studies is to use the academic platform to solve the complicate technical issues. DRDO in turn give the IIT’s or Universities sufficient grants against project and R&T schemes.
No one gets benefited neither the institutions nor the DRDO, it is because the most of the individuals after getting higher education working as admin, allied works, and the reaction of this most of them leave the organization. For example DR.DP Singh, Estate Manager, Scientist ‘F’ did his post graduation and PhDs from DRDO sponsoring and performing duty of admin purely non scientific assignment. Sh A.K Musla, Sc ‘F, holding post Joint Director Admin in IRDE, Dehradun, he also did his B.Tech and M.Tech from DRDO sponsored funds and working as purely in admin. I am quoting only two names as tip of the iceberg, because in DRDO you will find 100 of such cases. DRDO is shear wasting the corers and corers rupees public funds in the name of higher education programs. Although, the aim and object of the higher education program is really good, but in hands of bad corrupt officials, the output is wasting by DRDO.
According to the ministry, a total of 1,107 scientists, mostly young entrants, have resigned from the DRDO between 2003 and 2007, implying that on an average one person leaves every two days.
APPELLANT – Shri Prabhu Dayal DandriyalPUBLIC AUTHORITY – DRDO.
DATE OF HEARING – 29.06.2011
DATE OF DECISION – 29.06.2011
Facts:-
Heard today dated 29.06.2011. The appellant is present. DRDO is represented by Dr. A.K. Tyagi, Scientist ‘F’ and Dr. Deepak Mishra, Scientist ‘E’. These appeals are being disposed of through a common order. The parties are heard. The order passed in each case is as follows:
The RTI Request –
To Date 2nd June 2010 The CPIO & Addl Director, DRDO HQ No RTI/DRDO/HEd/2/6/2010 Room No. 314A DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg New Delhi – 110 105
Hello,
Kindly provide me the following information requested under the purview of Right to Information Act. 2005.
Total amount invested on long term post graduation training program and PhD program under R & T scheme, and under Post Graduate Training (PGT) scheme of DRDO during period for April 1990 – March 2010 under following heads
i) Adhoc advances ii) Study leave salary iii) Reimbursement of expenditure on account of stationary items, preparation of thesis, purchase of books and journals etc. iv) Non refundable fee v) TA vi) DA vii) Financial incentive on acquiring higher qualification at their own
2. Total number of official Grade wise/Post wise/ Categories wise received MS/ME/MTech, PhD degree during period April 1990 – March 2010
i) Full time ii) Part Time iii) External Registration 3. The Institution from where degree of MTech/ PhD was awarded from April 1990 – March 2010
4. Total amount invested on short term training/ workshops/seminars/courses in India (Including DIAT/ITM/IIM’s/ IIT’s, NIT’s, ESCI, ASCI, IISc’s etc.) and abroad, during period from April 1990 – March 2010
i) Training/ Courses/Delegations Fee/Registration Fee ii) TA iii) DA
Total number of Scientist resigned from April 1990 – March 2010
Total number of scientist joined DRDO from April 1990 – March 2010
Note: – Above required information is directly related to corruption and not come under schedule – II
Find the application fee for the request attached with this application. If you feel that above requested information does not pertain to your department then please follow the provisions of Section 6(3) of the RTI act 2005. Also as per the provision of the RTI Act 2005 please provide the details (Name and Designation) of the first appellate authority w.r.t. to your department with the reply to above request, where I may required file first appeal.
I do hereby declare that I am the citizen of India. Kindly provide me with the information at the address mentioned with the application. I request you to ensure that the information is provided before expiry of 30 day period after you have received the application.
Enclosed – Rs 10 Postal Order No 60E 034929
RegardsPrabhu Dayal Dandriyal21-Sunderwala, RaipurDehradun-248008Phone – 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,e-mail id prabhu@dandriyal.com Blog – http://corruptionindrdo.blogspot.com
The RTI request was denied by CPIO, DRDO Hqrs on 2nd June 2010
The Appellate Authority, DRDO Hqrs was denied on 16th August 2010
File No.CIC/LS/A/2011/000381:- CIC Decision
The amounts spent on Long Term Post Graduation Training Programme and Ph.D Programme under RT Scheme for last three years, viz. 2008, 2009 & 2010 may be supplied to the appellant
Appeal to clean DRDO of corrupt and anti-national officials