Tag Archives: Dolly Bansal

Drdo

SUBMISSION OF THE FACTS OF COLLUSIN OF THE DOP, DRDO HQRS Dr. A.K. SINGH WITH THE ILLEGALLY APPOINTED RELATIVE SCIENTIST OF THE DRDO etc.

6 Comments

To                                                                                                               12th April 2015                 Hon’ble Shri Manohar Parrikar,                                                                                                     Defence Minister,Room No -104,                                                                                                   South Block,New Delhi-110011

SUBJECT:-  SUBMISSION OF THE FACTS OF COLLUSION OF THE                                         DOP, DRDO HQRS Dr. A.K. SINGH WITH THE ILLEGALLY                               APPOINTED RELATIVE SCIENTIST OF THE DRDO   etc.

Sir,

  1. DOP, Dr. A.K. Singh did not take timely action on the letters of cvc and cvo of mod on the illegal Appointments of blood relatives of senior scientist of DRDO as scientists namely SMT. T chandrabanu, Ms Swati Sriwastava, Ms Dolly Bansal & SMT. S Geetha to illegally retain them for the period as much as possible. He did not carry out his duty meticulously against illegal appointment of SMT. S Geetha to please his ex-boss Dr.W. Selvamurthy.
  2. He did not take the following actions as expected from him in the capacity of DOP to know the truth of the experience certificate, got issued from Dr.Ambedkar centre for Bio-Medical research of Delhi university (ACBR of DU) by SMT. S Geetha D/O Dr.W. Selvamurthy Ex- CC R&D, HR
  • Has not called for any explanation as yet from SMT. S. Geetha to tell the organization  about the name of the projects & names & designations of the principal investigators of the projects of the ACBR of DU in which she worked during November 1999 to January 2000 and for the same she was issued a experience certificate.
  • Has not called for any explanation as yet from SMT. S. Geetha about the date on which SMT. S. Geetha applied for the post of temporary research assistant in ACBR of DU in 1999.
  • Has not called for any explanation as yet from SMT. S. Geetha about the procedure and mode of selection to the post of temporary research assistant in ACBR of DU in 1999
  • Did not produce the original copy of the experienced issued to SMT. S Geetha by officiating Director Dr.Veena Brahamchari of ACBR of DU to the high power committee of Shri Bhujanga Rao & Shri Anup Malhotra set up on the orders of defence minister in  which DOP was himself a member.
  • Did not call for any explanation as yet from SMT. S. Geetha, SC-D of DIPAS, Delhi to know all the facts for issuance of the experience certificate to her by ACBR of DU.
  1. Has been instrumental in sending delayed & distorted replies to the CBI since 01-10-2012 (the date from which he is holding the charge of DOP) in respect of the ongoing through inquiry  against 04 illegal appointed relatives of the senior scientist of DRDO i.e. against SMT. T  Chandrabanu, Swati Sriwastava, Dolly Bansal & SMT. S Geetha.
  2. Has been instrumental in transferring DRDS Cadre Scientists by pick & choose rule without following any uniform policy.
  3. Has harassing the husband-wife scientists by not posting them at a convenient place violating the GOVT. policy.
  4. Has been adopting dilatory tactics to harass the employees of DRDO (who submit genuine grievances on service matters to DRDO HQ to obtain justice through administrative channel) by    unnecessarily seeking opinions of the nodal departments even in the matters where the rule position is expressively clear.
  5. Remains dormant in redressing the genuine grievances & acts super actively to help the dishonest employees & officers of the DRDO which shows his possession of doubtful integrity.
  6. Appointed retired officers of AFHQ Cadre, DRDS Cadre, service officers & DRDS Cadre officers as consultants during his tenure as DOP for the regular jobs for which either replacement have joined in DRDO or for the jobs for which no such appointments is permissible under concerned. He even allowed continuation of the tenure of such illegally appointed consultants.
  7. Has been implementing the special pay to the scientist ‘G’ & counting of the special pay in the fixation of Scientist ‘H’ & tapering of the variable increments of the Scientists by violating  the concerned express rules of DOP&T & ministry of Finance.
  8. Has omitted his duty as DOP with regard to misconducts of Shri A.K. Maini retired Director of LASTEC to save him from vigilance action.
  9. Dr A K Singh deliberately delayed in processing the case of misconduct prima facie against Dr A K Tyagi, Sc ‘G’ so he could get promotion to the post of Sc ‘G’ before issuance of formal charge sheet. He did not propose his suspension of Dr.A K Tyagi even when charges of corruption were forwarded by CVC for investigation to DRDO through CVO, MoD

It is requested that do needful in this with above all reference to save the DRDO.

Regards

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

Drdo

CVC orders penalty against DRDO official

2 Comments

ABHINANDAN MISHRA   Sunday Guardians NEW DELHI | 30th Sep 2012

The officer has been found guilty of appointing his senior’s daughter without following the due process.

The Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) has advised the initiation of major penalty proceedings against an additional director rank officer and his superior, a director, with the Defence Research Development Organisation (DRDO). The officer has been found guilty of appointing his senior’s daughter without following the due process. The proceedings have been advised after a complaint filed by the Ministry of Defence (MoD) was probed by the CVC.

The CVC has recommended the penalty against A.K. Bansal, who was at that time additional director (Recruitment and Assessment Centre) (Scientist F) and Arun Kumar, director, (RAC) (outstanding scientist). Bansal illegally facilitated Kumar’s daughter’s appointment.

The Recruitment and Assessment Centre (RAC) of DRDO looks after the recruitment and promotion of scientists in the organisation.

The CVC in its memorandum dated 23.08.2012 has stated, “The case has been examined by the commission. On facts of the case, the commission in agreement with MoD, advises initiation of major penalty proceedings against Dr. Arun Kumar, Senior Scientist, DRDO, and Shri A.K. Bansal, Additional Director, RAC.”

The CVC has also asked the ministry to reconsider the appointment of Swati Shrivastava, daughter of Arun Kumar, who is working as Scientist C in DRDO. “Further, the commission advises the ministry to reconsider the appointment of Ms. Swati Srivastava, daughter of Dr. Arun Kumar.”

“This is a clear case of corruption and misuse of position to appoint close relatives,” an employee of DRDO stated on the condition of anonymity.

Arun Kumar is serving as Director (Personnel) in the DRDO headquarters at present. A.K. Bansal, who retired in 2009, was till last month working with the Institute of Defence Scientists and Technologists (IDST), a registered body of retired DRDO professionals, which claims to provide consultancy, expertise and assistance to DRDO.

The DRDO had earlier tried its best to stonewall an RTI (Right to Information) query filed by an employee of the organisation, seeking to inspect the records related to the employment of Dolly Bansal, daughter of A.K. Bansal. DRDO, while refusing to allow the inspection of records, had said that it was an exempted organisation under the RTI Act.

However, the Central Information Commission rejected the DRDO’s contention and said that since it was related to alleged irregularities in the selection of Dolly Bansal as a scientist and there was no harm in the inspection of the available records.

When contacted, DRDO spokesperson Ravi Kumar Gupta said that the organisation follows a transparent and fair policy of recruitment: “It may be a matter of difference of perception (the findings of CVC). Decisions by RAC related to recruitment are taken by a chairman who is independent of the scientific advisor. However, whatever action is required to be taken, will be taken.”

Air Chief Marshal N.A.K. Browne with DRDO officials during a function in Bangalore earlier this month. PTI