Tag Archives: Dr V K Saraswat

Drdo

Corruption in SASE, DRDO, Chandigarh

13 Comments

To                                                                                                                13th April 2015                 Hon’ble Shri Manohar Parrikar,                                                                                                     Defence Minister,Room No -104,                                                                                                   South Block,New Delhi-110011

Subject: Corruption in SASE, DRDO, Chandigarh

Sir,

Some of DRDO scientists/officials are so expertise in corruption that they can squeeze money even from the scrap also.

Last year October 2014, SASE, DRDO tried to cleared his scrap material at J&K more than 100 tons.

The Firm M/s Jai Mata Trader, Chandigarh was awarded contract to lift the Iron scrap etc vide order no No MPG/Sale Order/2014-15/8212/01/Dis dated 17th July 2014.

The above order was given to lift 55000 Kgs @ Rs 23.92/Kg but as per SASE store records the vendor only lifted 37020 Kgs due to unavailability of trucks and labuors.

As per sources the six trucks loaded from scrap site out of six trucks, Five (5) trucks were caught and detained by J&K Police in Ramban Police station for the charge of overloading etc, the FIR was registered all formalities were done and case is pending in the court, J&K

M/s Jai Mata Trader, Chandigarh lifted 37020 Kgs and paid only Rs 907122.00 to SASE, DRDO Six trucks loaded (over loaded).

It means each truck lifted 6170 Kg scarp only then how can these trucks were detained by J&K police for overloading charges.

Sir, if DRDO weighing scale is such a way calibrated then you can imagine the fate of data we are receiving from SASE, DRDO, will our services march with these data, it is big question?

Sir, Sh Ashwagosh Ganju, Sc G, Director, Snow & Avalanche Study Establishment is new in corruption business but few of his aides are master in this field, the scale for judging individuals corruption capacity in DRDO is that the profile, if the person got so many DRDO in house awards without contributing anything like papers published in international journals /patents etc or member of Dr V K Saraswat’s favorite society. It means he possess the doctorate of corruption. In case of Sh Ashwagosh Ganju, he is only member of Dr V K Saraswat’s favorite society.

Sir, It is requested that please take a appropriate action to protect one of the important lab of DRDO which is very useful to combat natural calamities, but corruption is  gradually percolate in SASE, will send you more after homework.

Regards

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

Enclosed – Noting Sheet of closing lifting contract of scrap

SASE scrap lifting case noting page 1
SASE scrap lifting case noting page 1

 

SASE scrap lifting case noting page 2
SASE scrap lifting case noting page 2
Drdo

CORRUPTION FREE DRDO- REAL TRIBUTE TO “SWACHH BHARAT ABHIYAN”

Leave a comment

Our Hon’ble Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi has given an enthusiastic and passionate call for ‘Swachh Bharat Mission’ to realise Mahatma Gandhi’s dream of cleanliness, urging everyone to devote minimum two hours every week towards cleanliness. Needless to say that the “Swachh Bharat Abhiyan” is the crying need, as India, the otherwise recognized religious and spiritual capital of the world is also well-known as the filthiest country on the globe. ‘Swachh Bharat Mission’ is a mass movement to realize Gandhi’s visualization of clean India by 150th Birth Anniversary on 2nd October 2019. The Mahatma’s visualisation of cleanliness was three-pronged – a clean mind, a clean body and clean surroundings. Holding that ‘Cleanliness is next to godliness’, he emphatically wrote, “We can no more gain God’s blessing with an unclean body than with an unclean mind. A clean body cannot reside in an unclean city”. (Young India 19/11/1925) An old proverb says, “Cleanliness is next to godliness.” This means that cleanliness comes next to godliness in im­portance.The whole statement means cleanliness takes a common man to the proximity of God. This journey starts from cleanliness of clothes, body and surroundings. Everything around us should be clean and beautiful. For which, Addison says “Beauty produces love, but cleanliness preserves it”. The very famous quote of our “Father of Nation” is “I WILL NOT LET ANYONE WALK THROUGH MY MIND WITH THEIR DIRTY FEET”. Then, there is the cleanliness of mind. Mind should be clear off from all the feelings of hatred, harm and haram (sinful). Buddha’s eight fold path emphasized much in the cleanliness of mind. When the dirt of sinfulness is obliterated from the screen of mind, noble, lovable and pious actions come into action. Mahatma Gandhi also told that “Cleanliness of mind and body is the first step in education”. Means  शिक्षा का पहला चरण दिमाग और शरीर की सफार्इ है. DRDO is spending crores of rupees onEnvironmental Control Hygiene Maintenance Services (ECHMS) contract. For example the open tender for DMSRDE, Kanpur dated 01 September 2014 is having an estimated cost of Rs. Twenty two Lakhs Fifty Thousand and Open tender for ADE, Bangalore dated 16-09-2014 is having an estimated cost of Rs. One Crore. So DRDO top management should not worried about cleanliness of roads, residential complexes, offices, work places, parks/gardens and toilets etc. DRDO officials needs cleanliness of mind based on principles of Mahatma Buddha and Mahatma Gandhi that will make DRDO corruption free and that will be true homage to Mahatma Gandhi Ji  and real contribution in Prime Minister “Clean India Mission”.

2nd October – Mahatma Gandhi Jayanti

Mahatma Gandhi Vision – Gandhi Ji’s loves Harijan & weaker section of society DRDO Acts – Harass SC/ST and minorities by all means to giving them base less Charge sheets, Deprive with promotions, awards and other benefits. The number of representations to grievances cell, SC/ST commission and CAT cases and minorities commissions are shows the clear picture of pathetic DRDO HR. The Madras high court on 25th September 2014 awarded a three-week jail term to the DRDO two so called top scientists for contempt of court Dr G Malakondaiah, CC R&D, DRDO and Padam Vibhusan Dr V K Saraswat, Ex DG, DRDO for harassing a minority individual Sh. S Joseph Raj shows the height of high  egoism prevailing in top DRDO officials.  vks-times-of-India

Drdo

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

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                                                                                            14th 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

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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)
  5. 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).
  6. 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.)
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
 
  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. No essential qualification, desirable qualification and years of experience were sought and mentioned in said DOP letter for the post of Director, QRS.
  6. 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 1st 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 of the Director, QRS and under which rule DOP & DHRD decided that only junior most Scientist ‘G’ are eligible for the said post, while in appointments seniority plays an important role and senior most officers always  given priority.
  7. Mere reading of the letter dated 14 August 2013 issued from DOP establishes the conspiracy in recruitment. The letter was issued on 14 August 2013 and it was clearly mentioned in para (2) of the letter, reproduced as it is for ready reference “2. The applications should be duly forwarded/recommended by their respective Directors the enclosed profoma (Annexure-I) and must reach this office latest by 21st August 2013”. Hence only 6 days were provided to all Scientist ‘G’ of 52 Lab/Estt situated allover India right from Leh to Kochi and Vizag to Tezpur. The Para-2 is the clear violation of DOPT norms because period should be minimum 15 days.
  8. As a matter of fact 15 August was National holiday, 16th was Friday, 17-18 August (week end holiday), 19-21 August (three working days). Now three questions arises

(i)                 Why only 04 working days was provided to submit the applications for post of Director, QRS?

(ii)               What was the urgency to keep very short time for submitting applications?

(iii)             Whether it was possible in any circumstances that ink signed copy of the application duly recommended by respective Director be reach with in two-three days by speed post to New Delhi far from various Lab/Estt. Of DRDO.

  1. Answer to the questions raised in point(14) above is that applications were sought within DRDO simply to make formality and have a record that no Scientist ‘G’ applied for the said post or found eligible for the said post. It is matter of investigation by CVC from records that how many applications were received for post of Director, QRS, whether any list were prepared, whether any interview/interaction were organized, whether any committee scrutinized the proforma of Scientist ‘G’ and whether any Scientist ‘G’ was found suitable for the post of Director, QRS, DRDO Hqrs.
  2. In fact said post were preplanned for Shri Saroj Kumar Patel since the December 2012 therefore any Scientist ‘G’ out of 507 Scientist ‘G’ of DRDO was not selected for the post of Director, QRS, DRDO Hqrs and post remain vacant.
  3. Further to accommodate Shri Saroj Kumar Patel in DRDO an advertisement for post of Scientist ‘G’ were again issued by RAC, DRDO vide Advt. No. 112/October 2013 under direct recruitment scheme of DRDO under direction & guidance of Shri Avinash Chander with vested interest. Copy of the Advt No. 112/October 2013 is enclosed-VI.
  4. Shri Saroj Kumar Patel was recruited as Scientist ‘G’ in DRDO against the 01 vacancy of Scientist ‘G’ vide RAC Advt No. 112/October 2013 and joined DRDO at DRDO HQrs, DRDO Bhawan, New Delhi with effect from 27 March 2014 at seniority no. 486 among Scientist ‘G’ of DRDO.
  5. As a matter of fact Shri Saroj Kumar Patel joined DRDO as Scientist ‘G’ on 27 March 2014(Thursday) and appointed as Director, QRS, DRDO HQrs on 31 March 2014(Monday) so he worked only two days 27-28 March 2014 and jumped to post of Director only in service of 04 days. Shri Avinash Chander appointed Shri Patel as Director; QRS ignoring the 485 senior Scientist ‘G’ already available in DRDO and it establish favoritism & nepotism. It can only happened in DRDO.
  6. Now again four question arises

i.            Why Shri Patel was appointed as Director, QRS while he was recruited against vacancy of Scientist ‘G’ not for the post of Director, QRS by ignoring 485 senior Scientist ‘G’ in DRDO?

ii.            What is the specialization of Shri Patel which is not available with 507 Scientist ‘G’ of DRDO, can the conspirators able to justify?

iii.            Why so much favoritism was given to Shri Patel for his recruitment as Scientist ‘G’ and appointment as Director, QRS since October 2012 to March 2014 by Shri Avinash Chander?

iv.            What special benefit DRDO get from Sh Patel’s tailor made appointment?

  1. Keeping in view of the facts mentioned above and the subordination of Smt Tessy Thomas with Shri Avinash Chander right from several years in ASL, Hyderabad, it is crystal clear gross violation of recruitment rules, ethics and procedures took place and the same were not followed in recruitment of Shri Patel as Scientist ‘G’ on 27 March 2014 and further his appointment as Director, QRS on 31 March 2014. This smacks planned conspiracy and criminal misconduct by Shri Avinash Chander, DGR&D, DRDO, Dr. A.K. Singh, Director of Personnel, DRDO Hqrs, Smt Hina Gokhle, Director, DHRD, Dr. RK Jain, Director, RAC and Dr. DN Reddy, Chairman, RAC.
  2. Therefore, it is kindly requested that appointment of Shri Saroj Kumar Patel, Scientist ‘G’ should be cancelled with immediate effect and inquiry be conducted under Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 and CCS (CCA) Rules 1965 against the senior officers of DRDO involved in planned conspiracy of recruitment and appointment of Shri Saroj Kumar Patel as Scientist ‘G’ in DRDO and appointment as Director, QRS, DRDO HQrs.
Regards
 
Prabhu  Dandriyal,
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun -248008 
0135- 2787750,   9411114879,  
  prabhudoon@gmail.com     www.corruptionindrdo.com

CVC-advice-regarding-Dr-Arun-Kumar. Ex DOP, DRDO
CVC-advice-regarding-Dr-Arun-Kumar. Ex DOP, DRDO

dna 19.2.2014sc g ad for sk patel

sk patel's appointmentsk patel appointment date1-cropDirector QRS call

Director QRS call application performa

sk patel's appointment

Drdo

RTI – DRDO Chair Game

1 Comment
To,                                                                                                   31 May 2014
Dr. RB Sharma, CPIO
DRDO HQ, Min. of Defence
DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg
New Delhi-110011                             

Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in respect of Dr S K Salwan, Ex Lab Director of DRDO who was appointed to –Dr B D Nagchoudhuri Chair for three years at a total cost of 83.064 Lakhs. The appointment was made by Ex DG, DRDO Dr V K Saraswat in a discretionary manner on nomination basis, The DRDO Chair was not reserved for Ex DRDO employees and no public notice was issued seeking applications for this highly paid post by DRDO authorities. Instead of paying monthly remuneration to Dr S K Salwan, DRDO released the first installment of Rs 27.688 on 28 April 2011 advance to Dr S K Salwan without deducting tax at source.  Dr S K Salwan joined on 2 May 2011 and as per audit report such seeking of paid expertise of ex employees on nomination basis is against the General Financials Rules of Govt. of India. Audit report says appropriate recoveries need to be effected forthwith. The above information related to clearly case of corruption and not exempted under section 24 (1) of RTI Act 2005.

  1. Please provide total amount released to Dr S K Salwan against his appointment to Dr B D Nagchoudhuri Chair
  2. Please provide total amount tax deducted from remuneration of Dr S K Salwan
  3. As suggested by Audit to appropriate recovery from remuneration of Dr S K Salwan. The total amount recovered by Dr S K Salwan.
  4. Present status of financial clearance with Dr S K Salwan, whether all amounts is cleared or pending.
  5. If pending than please provide total amount and then recovery initiation status.
Regards
Prabhu  Dandriyal,
21-Sunderwala, Raipur,
Phone 0135- 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,
e-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com  website www.corruptionindrdo.com
Registration Number            MODEF/R/2014/61009
Drdo

RTI-DRDO-Rs 288.00 Lakhs Scam – CR Rao Advanced Institute of Mathematics, Statistics and Computer Science,(AIMSCS) Hyderabad

Leave a comment
To                                                                                                                                  29th May 2014 
Dr. RB Sharma, CPIO,
DRDO HQ, Min. of Defence,
DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg,
New Delhi-110011 

Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 in respect of sanction a project of Rs 288.oo Lakhs to Prof V R Reddy, CR Rao Advanced Institute of Mathematics, Statistics and Computer Science,(AIMSCS) Hyderabad (a Society) for Project titled NIMO Radar- Spatial Diversity, Spatial Resolution and Transmitter Waveform in Target Detection, Resolution and Identification. The projection sanction by Dr V K Saraswat, Ex-DG, DRDO

  1. Total money released to AIMSCS Society, Hyderabad by DRDO
  2. Present status of project it is delivered (Yes or No)
  3. If not than DRDO has initiated to recover funds from  AIMSCS Society, Hyderabad (Yes or No)
  4. Copy of financial expenditure details submitted by AIMSCS Society, Hyderabad

Note : Matter is directly related to corruption and not exempted under Section 24 (1), as  Dr V K Saraswat, Ex-DG, DRDO happened to be the president of AIMSCS Society governing body. Hence, without prejudice to the correctness of the decision relating to this Grant-in-Aid, it was against the canons of financial propriety for SA to RM to have sanctioned grants to a society headed by him. Release of advance payment to the society even for salary in respect of non-existent manpower blocks government funds and provides an opportunity to private society to earn interest income. DRDO was hired a consultant and the consultant is also planning to hire consultant. CGDA special audit also raised serious objection on this matter.

Regards
Prabhu  Dandriyal,
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun -248008
phone 0135 -2787750 Mobile 0911114879
e-mail id – prabhudoon@gmail.com website -www.corruptionindrdo.com
Registration Number            MODEF/R/2014/60997
Drdo

After First Extension, Second Extension than Contract without output please spare the country

Leave a comment
To                                                                                                                                 27th may 2014
Sh. Narendra Modi
Prime Minister
Room No – 152, PMO,
South Block, NEW DELHI -110011

Subject:  The Appointment Committee of the Cabinet appointed Sh. Avinash Chander on contract basis.

With the passage of time the dignity of the office of Scientific Adviser to RM has taken a nose dive. Initially the organization (DRDO) was headed by eminent scholars and internationally recognized faces like Dr. D S Kothari, Dr. S Bhagavantam, Dr. B D Nagchaudhuri, Prof. M G K  Menon, Dr. Raja Ramanna and Dr. V S Arunachalam  whose scientific contribution were know across the globe.

Unfortunately when the honorary post of the Scientific Adviser to RM was converted to DG, DRDO and Secretary DRD, the takers of the plum post were apolitical. The search committee used to recommend a person with established credentials as the individual would lead 30000 strong scientific/technical workforces and was supposed to deliver products for three defence forces.

The KARGIL War however exposed the credit of DRDO as countrymen were ditched. The justification of successive failures was given as the non-availability of imported critical systems/subsystems, components, etc.

Later, the top offices gave a new theory of system integration instead of developing indigenous systems/subsystems as import substitutes. The successive government was not in a position to analyze properly the role of DRDO and the fallout was that a vacuum was created in the chain of command.

As far as the expenditure is concerned, the office of Scientific Adviser’s focus shifted to infrastructure development (primarily acquiring land, expansion of building and dumping of equipment) instead of research and development of systems.

DRDO consumes Rs. 10000 crores annually.

The scientific community down the channel are preparing justification for annual expenditure and in the absence of ACCOUNTABILITY they simply burry the product in the name of technology demonstration with obsolete technology imported from elsewhere.

When Dr. V K Saraswat, Ex-SA to RM was due to retire after successive extensions. The search committee was ignorant to the requirement of SA to RM’s office and new incumbent Sh. Avinash Chander was selected by ACC out of the 12 officers without having any credential to their account even on national level.

The information revealed under RTI is enclosed for your ready reference.

Honorable Sir, after sixty six years of independence, for first time people of India have given such a great and unprecedented mandate based on your commitment, patriotism and providing avenues for betterment of the country.

The previous government, even after being in office for two successive terms, had failed to implement ACCOUNTABILITY in DRDO. DRDO with passage of time has reduced to a mere organization where the workforce is provided hefty salaries as social commitments.

We hope that DRDO will overhaul thoroughly and with ACCOUNTABILITY enforced, turn into a productive organization.

Currently, DRDO has a large number of scientists in service extensions 60 to 62 and 62 to 64 and the astonishing fact is that maximum are involved in non-scientific activities.

Early address to this “extension business” and “Contract Business” will help to curb the neck deep corruption in DRDO.

It is really strange that in 125 crore families, we have not been able to find the right eligible person and have ended up relying upon contract culture.

With warm regards

Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun-248008
Phone – 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,
E-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com, Website – www.corruptionindrdo.com

 

Enclosed

  1. Copy of RTI reply from CPIO, Cabinet Secretariatavanash chander recuirtment details avanash chander recuirtment details1 avanash chander recuirtment details2
Drdo

Constitutional crises in DRDO

Leave a comment

DRDO comes under the Ministry of Defence, Government of India and all central government rules are applicable.

However, beginning with 1980 (prior to this DRDO was running under defence secretary) when D G (R&D) post was created and approved by cabinet with status of secretary as independent charge of R&D, foundation were laid for an autonomous & central govt. body both.

Special status was given for program director of IGMDP with permission sign 10 cr papers while directors/lab heads limitation was 2.5 Lakhs.

In the name of science & technology development, recruitments were made to develop defence specific weapons/equipments/infrastructures. A separate recruitment and assessment centre (RAC) was created with consent of UPSC and with approval of government.

The absolute empowerment of secretary DRDO gave the individual to implement his decision and with passage of time the interest of nation was over shadowed. The secretary DRDO made the entire lab directors independent and unaccountable.

Today the scenario is no system exists in DRDO, every director following their own rules, whether it is case of procurements/ recruitments / assessments / maximum time busy with construction/renovations etc.

They don’t bother new born D.Gs, DOP, RTI cell and even Secretary, DRDO. Why? Because they know after few days, Dr Avinash Chandra will be working in contract basis. No one is listening his order as well as his advice. For example, Director, Dr CP Ramanarayanan, GTRE not honoring the order of Dr Avinash Chandra, the new DG Electronics Communication System Sh. S S Sundaram also supporting the acts and deed of Director, Dr CP Ramanarayanan, GTRE (because of regionalism). Transfer case of Mr Sachin GTRE to DEAL is a clear cut example of environment of DRDO; the words uttered by Dr. CP Ramanarayanan are resonating in the ears of all top DRDO Hqrs officials.

Dr Avinash Chandra told a scientist that your request is genuine but I am helpless. The scientist got transfer order one and half year back but the because of the dictatorship of Director, LRDE, Sh S Ravind the transfer is still pending and our  Dr Avinash Chandra, SA, Dr G Malakondaiah, DS & CC R&D (HR & M), and DOP, Dr A K Singh all are helpless. Although Dr G Malakondaiah talked in front of the individual scientist with Sh S S Sundaram (conversation was in Telegu) but it did not turn positive.

Surprisingly, the aim and objective of Rama Rao committee was that the power is decentralized for fast decision on procurement issues, management issues. This would give boost for high productivity or pace in development program. It is looking like a total failure in the beginning itself.

Instead of all this all new DG are too busy to manage big chunks of funds and showing off the power of their new kingdom.

DRDO labs directors, mostly known as distinguished or outstanding scientists but it is astonishing fact that most them are not known in India because they have never published any outstanding paper, not have any patents, if PhD then from deemed universities where they are suppose to feed project funds. Like their big guru Dr W Selvamurthy Ex C C R&D, who is PhD in Yoga and involved in feeding funds to various deemed universities or private institutions. (Famous SASTRA case everyone knows). Rest are following their footsteps like Sh S S Sundaram, new born DG, Sh RC Agarwal, Director, DEAL (2nd extension age 63+ yrs), Sh R K Agarwal another outstanding scientist now start pursuing PhD from Graphic Era, also new born Deemed University at Dehardun because they fed funds in the name of projects and their agents ex DRDO employees are managing the show.

A constitutional crisis was the appointment of RAC Chairman. Dr PS Goel was appointed for period 3rd December 2008 – 2nd December 2011. As per rule search committee for next RAC chairman was supposed to be constituted in June 2011. However, minutes (DOP/05/50219/M/01 7th Dec 2011 disclose that first meeting of newly constituted committee was scheduled for 19 December 2011, it is astonishing fact that DRDO writes its own constitution and shows disrespect to Honorable Raksha Mantri.

Negligence of then SA to RM, not to initiate search committee in time was a planned action. He wanted to push all his close aides to appropriate place/post, who were handling sub contracts signed with foreign firms with different areas and were responsible omission/commission dues. The period of Dec 2011 to June 2012 was the crucial period of assessment/recommendations/selections/promotions. To cash this opportunity   Dr V K Saraswat as chairman RAC recommended those who were not competent for the post of ‘H’. Had there been an independent RAC Chairman, he would kept the national interest in forefront. The example of the case of Sh R K Agarwal, Scientist ‘H’ at DEAL, DRDO, Dehradun, who prepared citation for promotion with a false claim (Copy of his claim) attached and got promoted with the blessing of Sh R C Agarwal, Director, DEAL (2nd extension without any achievement) and Dr V K Saraswat.

The letter no 12/7/2012 EO(SM-II) dated 19th March 2012 of DOPT revealed that appointment of

as RAC chairman was approved by Appointment Committee of Cabinet (ACC). The question is why it was waited up to June 19th, 2012; time was buying to adjust all incompetent senior officials by Dr V K Saraswat.

It is requested to Sh A K Antony, honorable Raksha Mantri order for investigation of assessment year 2012 scientist ‘H’.

DOPT letter no 12/7/2012 EO(SM-II) dated 19th March 2012
DOPT letter no 12/7/2012 EO(SM-II) dated 19th March 2012

 

Office order of additional charge given to Dr V K Saraswat as Chairman, RAC
Office order of additional charge given to Dr V K Saraswat as Chairman, RAC
Note sheet of approval of Raksha Mantri for additional charge of Chairman RAC to Dr V K Saraswat
Note sheet of approval of Raksha Mantri for additional charge of Chairman RAC to Dr V K Saraswat
DRDO News Letter September 2012
DRDO News Letter September 2012

 

 

 

Drdo

Tatra trucks are fine, says DRDO Chief

Leave a comment

Surinder Jeet (USA)
01 Apr, 2012 02:03 AM
V K Saraswat has not answered the general’s allegations. The general has said that Tatra is too expensive. DRDO has not disputed it. That Tatra is delivering the service is like saying Bofors Guns are firing. They should. Can Tatra or similar truck be bought from other suupliers? Will they give more for the same money or will they cost less. DRDO would be wise not to drag itself into lime light. As it is it is in trouble for its own scandals and poor performance. My question now is,”why did they enter the fray?. What is their interest”?

jk (delhi)
01 Apr, 2012 01:48 AM
Everybody is trying to cover their as***, DRDO is a joke, even after many decades what indeginious product has come out of their stable?, even if there is one or two, are they being mass produced and are they world class that they are being exported?. This and other public sectors are a drain on the economy. I have a feeling DRDO’s palm has been greased and money exchanged to go for these trucks.

RAhul (Delhi)
01 Apr, 2012 01:35 AM
DRDO is scinetists are just feeding on tax payers money.If we need to procure defense equipment from pverseas suppliers…Why not close down DRDO.

subhash (h.pur)
01 Apr, 2012 01:23 AM
Mr. VK Sarasvat, The strength of the elephant is not under the clot but the cost.We are paying the price of 5 elephant to get only 3 . Kickback; corruption and nazrana ,whatever you call is the issue.

aks (USA)
31 Mar, 2012 11:43 PM
EXcept one or two divisions in DRDO all others are either doing nothing or are useless for nation, the so called scientists go to office to search internet play computer games and to gossip… I have tonnes of friends in DRDO and what I am saying here is there daily routine Most of the things made by DRDO is either obselete or useless for army and airforce… therefore we have to go for an MMRCA or BARHMOS as DRDO is incapable ….even the engine for LCA has still to come …DRDO is a political agency , where people know how to make comments like our incapable , despicable politicians

dkddn2 (delhi)
31 Mar, 2012 11:35 PM
Saraswat should be ashamed of heading of an organisation that cannot create anything but rebrand the foreign products. Is he not ashamed of the fact that DRDO had not been able to identify an Indian manufacturer for these missiles ? DRDO is infact a middleman now.

Abihshek (India) replies to dkddn2
01 Apr, 2012 12:29 AM
I don’t know about now but atleast in 2005, even to sit for an interview with DRDO/ISRO, the candidate had to be among the top 3 or 5 of his class. It was dream to work for them but I couldn’t even sit for the interview. And I’m sure everybody knows what kind of people are USUALLY among the top 3, especially in India. So a majority of people who work for these organizations are rote-learners who can memorize and score in exams but are not creative. I’m now working abroad in an Aerospace company who were happy to accept me. There would be thousands like me who would be dying to work for these organizations but can’t due their stupid recruitment policies.

Arif (India)
31 Mar, 2012 11:28 PM
That shows intelligence of DRDO chief. Either he is on drugs or does not understand issue. Issue is about :(1) Bribe (2) Middleman (violation of rule) (3) When Tata and Ashok Leland can produce better trucks then why Tatra?

 

Drdo

Civil Suit No. 1200/2011-1. Dr. Vijay Kumar Saraswat-SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF COMPENSATION AND DAMAGES :- Re. 1/- (RUPEE ONE ONLY)

3 Comments

IN THE COURT OF HON’BLE CIVIL JUDGE, SENIOR DIVISION, PUNE AT PUNE 

Regular  Civil  Suit  No. 1200/2011.

Dr. Rohidas Gopinath Taware
Age: 55 yrs.  Occupation: Service
Residing at:   A-11, Vijayraj Sankul,
Aundh-Baner, D.P. Road,
Pune – 411 007.                                                            —       Plaintiff

 Vs.

1.      Dr. Vijay Kumar Saraswat,
Age: 62 yrs.  Occupation: Service
The Scientific Adviser to Raksha Mantri and
Director General, Research & Development,
DRDO, DRDO Bhavan,
New Delhi- 110105.
 
 2.      The Union of India
Represented by
The Secretary,
Ministry of Defence, Govt. of India,
South Block,
New Delhi -110 011.                                            —       Defendants

SUIT    FOR    RECOVERY  OF   COMPENSATION   AND DAMAGES :-  Re. 1/- (RUPEE  ONE  ONLY)

The plaintiff most respectfully submits before this Hon’ble Court as under:-

1.      The plaintiff was working in High Energy Materials Research Laboratory (HEMRL), Pune, the unit of DRDO, under Ministry of Defence, Govt. of India.  He was working as a Technical Officer ‘B’. It is a Gazetted Group ‘A’ post. He completed 26 years’ spotlessly clean service in HEMRL, Pune. Not a single letter of instruction / warning, any memo or any show cause notice is on his entire record.

But on 24.08.2009 at 16.45 hrs, the Plaintiff was suspended by fax order, all of a sudden, without any show cause notice. The suspension order bears the signature of Dr. Arun Kumar, the Director of Personnel (DoP). The order is issued as per section 10 (1) of CCS (CCA) Rules, but Dr. Arun Kumar is not the authority who can sign the suspension order of a Gazetted Group ‘A’ Officer.  Dr. Arun Kumar, on 08.06.2010 has admitted this fact in his deposition as a Defence Witness before the Inquiry Officer.  The Plaintiff immediately lodged a protest against this unauthorized and hence illegal order. As the Defendant No.1 is the Director General of DRDO and as he is the only Disciplinary Authority of the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff had submitted a copy of the protest to him also.

2.      Though the ultimate responsibility of the working of DRDO lies with Defendant No.1, he did not take any cognizance of the protest of the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff submitted his grievance to the Defendant No.1 through his letters sent on 16.09.2009, 21.10.2009, 03.12.2009, 18.12.2009, 02.03.2010, 27.05.2010, 09.07.2010, 14.07.2010, 24.08.2010 and 01.12.2010. The Plaintiff sent him the legal notices on 14.09.2009, 02.03.2010 and 19.03.2010. But Defendant No.1 did not give any response to any of the letters or notices of the Plaintiff. He did not take any cognizance of the grievance of the Plaintiff.

3.      The Plaintiff was illegally compelled to go through the Inquiry proceedings and was penalized on 08.12.2010 under Rule 11 (ii) of CCS (CCA) Rules. This penalty order was issued by one Mr. S B Yadav, the Dy. DoP who is not at all the Disciplinary Authority of the Plaintiff. As if this was not enough, the Plaintiff was dismissed from the service. This Dismissal Order under Rule 11 (ix) of CCS (CCA) Rules was issued by one Mr. Abhinavjeet Ojha, the Dy. DoP, who is not at all the Disciplinary Authority of the Plaintiff. 

As per Article 311 of the Constitution, no person who is a member of a civil service of the Union shall be dismissed or removed by an authority subordinate to that by which he was appointed.

 4.      The DGR&D is the only Appointing and Disciplinary Authority of the Plaintiff. No officer below his rank can take any Disciplinary Action against the Plaintiff who is a Gazetted Group ‘A’ officer and a Doctorate fellow. As per Organization Chart of DRDO, DGR&D is on the top. Below him there are 11 CCR&Ds. And under one CCR&D, DoP is there. The person who has signed the dismissal order of the Plaintiff is one of the staff members of the Directorate of Personnel. There are no such posts as Associate Director, Deputy Director, Joint Director or Assistant Director in DRDO. Mr. Abhinavjeet Ojha is a self-styled and self-proclaimed Deputy Director of the Directorate of Personnel.

5.      The Plaintiff filed a Criminal complaint No. 1198/2011 in the Court of Hon’ble J.M.F.C. Court No.9, Pune against Dr. Arun Kumar, the DoP and his 5 colleagues. Hon’ble Court issued process against them all under sections 167 and 170 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code. The Plaintiff requested the Defendant No.1 to immediately suspend these accused as per Rule 10 (1) (b) of CCS (CCA) Rules.

6.       Though the Defendant No.1 is the only Disciplinary Authority of the Plaintiff, the officers much below his rank issued suspension order and penalty orders without any authority. The Plaintiff put up his grievance to Defendant No.1 but he did not take any action against the unauthorized officers. He remained a silent spectator. Moreover, he protected his erring subordinates who, without any authority played with the service life of the Plaintiff.

7.      The Plaintiff is dismissed from the service by the unauthorized officers and the Defendant No.1, the Head of DRDO is just looking at the situation as if he is not concerned at all. His inaction has deprived the Plaintiff of his service. Plaintiff has suffered a lot due to his inaction.

8.      Revengefully and mercilessly the Plaintiff has been dismissed from the service without any monetary benefits.  Without giving a single Rupee to the Plaintiff, he has been driven out of DRDO, after 26 years’ spotlessly clean service.  The Plaintiff is running 56 years of his age and huge liabilities are ahead of him now. And at such time the Plaintiff is extinguished from the service by a blatantly unauthorized and low grade officer. The provisions of CCS (CCA) Rules regarding the suspension and the dismissal have been arrogantly flouted by the unauthorized officers who are systematically protected by Defendant No.1. This is nothing but a torture by a very responsible officer i.e. Defendant No.1. As per the Organization Chart of DRDO he is the apex authority. Being a Disciplinary Authority, he has not dared to sign the dismissal order of the Plaintiff. He remained behind the curtain. His cowardly behavior has ruined the service life of the Plaintiff. This unbecoming of a Government servant is liable for the torture of the Plaintiff. He is liable to pay the compensation to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff wants compensation for his sufferings from Defendant No.1

9.      The amount of compensation is not material at all. Liability of Defendant No.1 to pay the compensation to the Plaintiff is material. The Plaintiff wants only one Rupee as the compensation. This one Rupee will definitely soothe the injury which Defendant No.1 has inflicted on the Plaintiff by his impotent neutrality in the matter.

10.   Notice to Government: Actually this suit is not against the Government, but as the Govt. officer is involved in his personal capacity, the notice u/s 80 of Civil Procedure Code has been sent to the Secretary, Ministry of Defence on 27.04.2011 for information only. The Plaintiff has not received any reply to the said notice from Defendant No. 1 or 2.  Defendant No. 2 has been made formal party to this suit.

11.   Jurisdiction: As the plaintiff is residing in the city of Pune and cause of action has happened in Pune, Hon’ble Court has jurisdiction to try this case.

12.   Cause of Action: First arose on 24.08.2009 when the Plaintiff was suspended by the unauthorized officer in DRDO. The cause of action is continuous since then till this date as the Defendant No.1 is protecting the illegal acts of his subordinates.

13.   Court Fee:  As this suit is for recovery of compensation of Rs.1/- (Rupee One only) it has been valued for Rs.1/- and required stamp of Rs.200/- is given herewith.

14.   It is, therefore, prayed that:-

a.      The Defendant No. 1 may kindly be ordered to pay compensation and damages of Re.1/- (Rupee One only) to the Plaintiff.

b.      Permission may be granted to amend the suit, if required.

c.       Any other just and equitable orders may be passed in the interest of the justice.

Pune
Dated: 29/08/2011
Plaintiff
(Dr. R G Taware)
 
(Mr. B R Barge)
Advocate for Plaintiff           

VERIFICATION

            I, Dr. Rohidas Gopinath Taware, Age – 55 years, Occupation – service, R/at- A-11, Vijayraj Sankul, S.No. 244, Aundh-Baner, D P Road, Pune- 411007, do, hereby, verify the above contents from Para 1 to 14 as true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief and in witness whereof I have put my signature under it at Pune on this 29th  day of  August 2011.

Plaintiff

(Dr. R G Taware)

IN THE COURT OF HON’BLE CIVIL JUDGE, SENIOR DIVISION, PUNE AT PUNE

 

Regular  Civil  Suit No. 1200/2011.

Dr. Rohidas Gopinath Taware                        .            —       Plaintiff

Vs.

Dr. V K Saraswat and other 1                                    —       Defendants

List of Documents submitted by Plaintiff is as follows:-

Sr.No.

Description of Document

Date

Page No.

1.

 Legal Notice to the  Secretary, Ministry of Defence, u/s 80 of Code of Civil Procedure 27.04.2011 01 – 02

2.

 Notice to Defendant No.1 (Dr. V K Saraswat) 27.04.2011 03 – 05

3.

 Suspension Order 24.08.2009 06

4.

 Protest letter of Plaintiff to Defendant No.1 for suspension order 26.08.2009 07 – 09

5.

 Legal Notice to Defendant No.1 14.09.2009 10 – 11

6.

 Representation of Plaintiff to Defendant No.1 against illegal order of suspension 16.09.2009 12 – 13

7.

 Letter of Plaintiff to Defendant No.1 for subsistence allowance 21.10.2009 14 – 15

8.

 Letter of Plaintiff to Defendant No.1 for illegal suspension by DoP 03.12.2009 16 – 17

9.

 Letter of Plaintiff to Defendant No.1 for illegal extension of suspension period 18.12.2009 18 – 19

10.

 Letter of Plaintiff to Defendant No.1  through the Director, HEMRL for inquiry and action for C-PAR for the year 2008 02.03.2010 20 – 23

11.

 Notice to Defendant No.1 02.03.2010 24 – 25

12.

 Notice to Defendant No.1 19.03.2010 26 – 27

13.

 Letter of Plaintiff to Defendant No.1 for illegal extension of suspension period 27.05.2010 28 – 30

14.

 Letter of Plaintiff to Defendant No.1 for illegal suspension & extension of suspension period 14.07.2010 31 – 34

15.

 Letter of Plaintiff to Defendant No.1 for anniversary of illegal suspension 24.08.2010 35 – 37

16.

 Letter of Plaintiff to Defendant No.1 for illegal extension of suspension period 01.12.2010 38 – 39

17.

 Penalty Order under Rule 11 (ii) of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 by Mr. S B Yadav, Dy. DoP 08.12.2010 40 – 41

18.

 Dismissal from service : Penalty Order under Rule 11 (ix) of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 by Mr. Abhinavjeet Ojha, Dy. DoP 30.12.2010 42 – 43

19.

 Protest letter against Punishment Order  dated 08.12.2010 by Plaintiff to Defendant No.1 through the Director, HEMRL 01.01.2011 44 – 45

20.

 Protest letter against Punishment Order  dated 30.12.2010 by Plaintiff to Defendant No.1 through the Director, HEMRL 10.01.2011 46 – 47

21.

 Letter of Plaintiff to Defendant No.1 for illegal dismissal from the service 14.01.2011 48 – 50

22.

 Letter of Plaintiff to Defendant No.1 for reservation of right of appeal 14.01.2011 51 – 52

23.

 Letter of Plaintiff to Defendant No.1 for reinstatement after penalty order dt. 08.12.2010 15.01.2011 53 – 54

24.

 Letter of Plaintiff to Defendant No.1 through the Director, HEMRL  regarding service benefits 07.03.2011 55 – 56

25.

 Notice to Defendant No.1 14.06.2011 57 – 58

26.

 Penalty Order by Mr. M Natarajan, DGR&D to Mr. M A Muhatte, STA’C’, HEMRL, Pune 30.06.2005 59 – 60

27.

 Penalty Order by Dr. V K Saraswat, DGR&D (Defendant No.1) to Mr. D T Bhosale, TO’A’, ARDE, Pune 17.03.2011 61

28.

 Regular Criminal Complaint by Plaintiff against Dr. Arun Kumar, DoP and his 5 colleagues in the Court of Hon’ble JMFC, PuneVerification of Complainant

Order below Exh.1 in RCC 1198/2011

Order below Exh.1 in RCC 1198/2011

 

 21.03.2011 

 

09.06.2011

07.05.2011

 

13.06.2011

 62 – 67 

 

 

68 – 71

72

 

73

 

All Xerox copies of documents are submitted by the Plaintiff.

Total No. of Documents:  28 (Twenty Eight) &

Total No. Pages                       :  73 (Seventy Three only).

 

PuneDate: 29.08.2011                                                                        Adv. For Plaintiff

(Mr. B.R. Barge)

Drdo

DRDO lets loose ‘missiles’ at armed forces

2 Comments

DRDO lets loose ‘missiles’ at armed forces

TNN May 27, 2010, 04.40am IST

NEW DELHI: After public bickering among Cabinet ministers, here comes the sharp divide in the defence establishment.

With PM Manmohan Singh, defence minister A K Antony and others watching, the faultlines that underlie the embittered DRDO-armed forces relationship erupted into plain view on Wednesday.

Defence Research and Development Organisation chief V K Saraswat, speaking at the National Technology Day awards function, tore into the armed forces for failing to overcome their “temptation” to induct the latest weapon systems from abroad.

This did not go down well with the forces, represented as they were by Air Chief Marshal P V Naik, Admiral Nirmal Verma and General V K Singh as well as other officers in the audience. Some officers told TOI that DRDO “promises too much” but delivers “too little, too late” and the forces are “forced” to push for import of weapon systems to maintain operational readiness.

“Some awards given today, for instance, are for Tejas Light Combat Aircraft, Nag anti-tank guided missile and Astra air-to-air missile. These are still not operational despite years, if not decades, of trials,” said an officer.

The spat comes just two days after the Navy chief held “a long meeting” with Antony to stress that it was high time DRDO got its act together, said sources.

Wednesday’s award ceremony began normally enough, with Saraswat listing out achievements ranging from launch of India’s first nuclear submarine INS Arihant to the planned test of the 5,000-km range Agni-V ballistic missile in 2011. But then, Saraswat let loose a couple of heat-seeking missiles. It’s grossly unfair to hold only DRDO responsible for the poor level of self-reliance in defence systems, he said.

“The responsibility should be shared by all stake-holders of defence ministry and cannot be placed on DRDO alone, which neither has the power to impose its products on its customer (forces), nor the mandate or capacity to produce

the developed systems all by themselves,” he said.

“Services also must understand that while the temptation may be overwhelming to field proven, state-of-the-art imported systems, they too have a role to play in the country’s economic and industrial growth. No foreign system can be customised to completely address our long-term requirements,” he added.

There is, of course, a lot in what Saraswat said. The armed forces certainly need to fully support DRDO to ensure self-reliance in critical weapon systems, the supply of which from abroad can easily be choked in times of crisis.

But it’s equally true DRDO projects cannot continue to be bedevilled with huge time and cost overruns.

The PM, on his part, said, “We should be able to acknowledge and learn from our setbacks. It’s a fact some projects have been delayed and others have faced difficulties during operational induction.”

 

Readers’ opinions

a.ravi. (chennai)

20 Jul, 2010 02:56 PM

defence ministry and the govt should wake up from sleep. all the defence projects should be with foreign tie ups. regards .a.ravi.

John (India)

27 May, 2010 08:59 PM

Its very essential to develop weapons indigenous. But instead of spending money and valuable time on conventional weapons which was already in use by other countries, our DRDO has to research on new kind of weapons which will give us upper hand in a war. Or our weapons should be next generation. All our weapons should be fully automated, computer controlled and should have some kind of artificial intelligence. We should prove ourselves and show to the world that we have capabilities in destroying enemy satellites and have the capability to protect our own satellite in case of a war which may give a upper hand in a war. We should have Predator UAV’s which should be more capable than other countries.

N.Shekar (Bangalore)

27 May, 2010 08:38 PM

DRDO is a white elephant eating away the Tax payer’s money. DRDO should be used only for research and Development and not for bulk manufacture as they simply cannot do it. For most of the employees of DRDO, it is just a past time job and none except a few work seriously. There is no team work and the employees and the management is just busy playing politics. There has been no headway made in the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), Nag anti-tank guided missile and Astra air-to-air missile. These are still not operational despite having spent countless amount of money. Every time the Defence minister visits the DRDO offices he sanctions crores of rupees and there is no accountability. Until and unless the so called DRDO is made accountable, nothing will be achieved and there is no use in cribbing that the armed forces are encouraging foreign Arms and ammunition.

raju (surat)

27 May, 2010 06:46 PM

Best thing is to privatise DRDO, we all know how government offices work. Most of the time goes in chatting, sipping tea, smoking, preparing tambacu etc. How will they produce cutting edge tech and time bound deliveries. With the best brains in the world we should put them to use in the right way and Private sector can only do that.

Narendra (Hyderabad)

27 May, 2010 06:36 PM

Ok wise guys,

harpreet (chandigrah) replies to a.ravi.

13 Aug, 2010 02:52 PM

there are many Indian companies which have better research and development capabilities, and they can produce much better arms and ammunition.ex-mhaindras and the tatas, all they need is a chance and we need to give them a fair chance. pinika multi barrel rockets are good example of this.

Milan Dutta (Kolkata)
27 May, 2010 06:12 PM

Armed forces must accept that this missile was right on target

A.P.MISRA. (Hyderabad)
27 May, 2010 05:47 PM

Blaming is very easy.No doubt DRDO moves at snails speed because they dont have a time bound programme to delver the goods.There are also lot of personnel politics involved in assigning the projects.There are very good scientists in the organisation who are dedicated to their work.The output of DRDO has to be translated by the Defence Production Units who owe equal responsibility for it.Corruption is one of the major factors which some how creeps in and ensures that the quality desired dosnt come out.vested interest of beneficiaries cannot be ruled out. 

Hussain (Hyderabad)
27 May, 2010 04:57 PM

DRDO is a Burden on our country. we pay thousands of crores of Rs for our scientist who has promised this country that they will stop all weapons import.I must admit Mr.Gopal has rightly said DRDO is an elephant. DRDO is nothing but a same old Govt office where files are fed to termites and buried.

Keviv (Bangalore)
27 May, 2010 04:47 PM

Right name of DRDO should be Delayed Research and Defective Organization. To top that they act high and might like there developing something very great. To see that a person need to come to Bangalore and see wastage of Tax Payers Money.