Tag Archives: FAA

Drdo

DRDO Having Blind RTI Cell

1 Comment

DRDO RTI Cell is acting as a blind body. Since RTI Act, 2005’s implementation, DRDO felt its power  and put all efforts to  get rid off but success was partial, Schedule – II exemption did not include the corruption and Human rights allegations and subsequently CIC also gave guidelines that, day to day administration and management matters are also not exempted.

This CIC supports give honest officials and citizen an immense power to fight against neck deep corruption/nepotism/favoritism prevailing in DRDO.

Cases started to expose the corrupt practice of senior DRDO officials in various matters like recruitment/promotions/procurements, etc and action started against corrupt officials by Defence Minister, CVO, CVC, etc

The DRDO management now come under desperation and looking after to fix those who are trying to expose the corrupt senior officers, few terminated/dismissed, few transferred, few deprived with promotions, a message was passed among the DRDO officials/employees, that if any one seeks RTI, he should be ready to face consequences and it is established that facts that DRDO management extensively used unwritten policy not give promotions or due credits to those who are involved in RTI acts practices.

It is a clear cut message to the nation that DRDO top management is a dishonest corrupt and  not working in the interest of the nation because it is not committed towards the constitution of India.

On 8th March 2014, Dr. R B Sharma, CPIO, DRDO Hqrs acted as a super boss and sent a letter to all Labs/ Establishments of DRDO to not give any information under RTI Act, 2005.

On 28th May, 2005 a meeting was held under DRDO transparency officer Dr. Sudershan Kumar, DS and CC R&D (PC & SI). In that he told to all DRDO’s CPIO not to supply any information under RTI Act-2005. It can be verified by records of DRDO’s RTI cell that no information was passed after this decision to any RTI applicant.

 That all RTI applicants receiving reply in the same format which was supplied by DRDO RTI Cell and First appellate authority reply was also given by DRDO in same format.

Surprisingly the following case of Dr. R G Taware, Ex- Technical Officer ‘B’ was to show the blind act of DRDO’s RTI cell.

Dr. R G Taware, Ex- Technical Officer ‘B’ was illegally dismissed by DRDO management with conspiracy. The conspiracy was proved by single point DRDO used then RRM, Sh Palam Raju for suspension and after dismissal and material fact is that RRM, Sh Palam Raju nor has the power for such approval, because as per Ministry of Defence orders of power delegation by Defence Minster shows he has never delegated such powers to RRM, Sh. Palam Raju specially for DRDO.

Dr. R G Taware, Ex- Technical Officer ‘B’ suspension /dismissal orders one of major allegation was “The tone and tenor of letter of Dr. R G Taware dated 26 Aug 2009”

Dr. R G Taware send an RTI request to CPIO, HEMRL, Pune, information sought that DRDO scientists developed a machine which can measure “The tone and tenor of any letter”, he asked whether scientist got any award and promotions for this great innovation.

The Blind DRDO RTI cell replied in a standard format “ You hereby inform that DRDO is placed in second schedule of RTI Act and exempted from disclosure of Information under Section 24 (1) exceptpertaining to the allegation of corruption and human right violations”( copy enclosed)

 Further after getting above reply from BLIND DRDO RTI Cell, Dr. R G Taware sent first appeal to FAA, DRDO to check their IQ.

Interestingly the height of blindness of DRDO RTI cell or to hell with RTI same standard reply send by FAA on the issue that “You hereby inform that DRDO is placed in second schedule of RTI Act and exempted from disclosure of Information under Section 24 (1) exceptpertaining to the allegation of corruption and human right violations”  (copy enclosed)

Great DRDO RTI cell proved their scientific capability in this RTI application replies – can the common Indian believe these DRDO scientists caliber for defence preparedness ??????????????

Dr R G Tawere's RTI application
Dr R G Tawere’s RTI application
CPIO, HEMRL, Pune's Reply
CPIO, HEMRL, Pune’s Reply
RG Taware RTI first appeal
RG Taware’s RTI first appeal Page 1
RG Taware RTI first appeal page2
RG Taware RTI first appeal page 2

RG Taware RTI first appeal reply page1 RG Taware RTI first appeal reply page2

    

Drdo

RTI- DMSRDE – Library Procurement

Leave a comment
To,                                                                                                       5th March 2014
Central Public Information Officer,
DMSRDE, DRDO, Min of Defence,
GT Road, Kanpur-208013

                  

Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information under purview of RTI Act 2005

Please refer following letters & CIC decision:

  1. DMS/0369/RTI/101/41/Letter_2013 dated 26 August 2013, DMS/0369/RTI/ 101/76/Letter_2013 dated 30 October  2013 & DMS/0369/RTI/FAR/2013/0013 dated 14 Nov  2013 issued by CPIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur
  2. RTI/02/2091/F/2013/0142 dated 14 Oct 2013 issued by FAA, DRDO HQ
  3. c.       CIC decision in F No. CIC/LS/A/2012/001219 dated 09 August 2012 : Rajiv Chauhan Vs DRDO
  4. RTI/02/P/2091/CIC/2012/001219 dated 25 Sep 2012 from RTI Cell, DRDO HQ, New Delhi

In light of the above, kindly provide following information under Section 6(1) of RTI Act 2005.

  1. Copy of Audit report of LTA party-IV O.L. No. 13 dt. 7.3.2008 ‘Delayed delivery of Journals worth Rs. 28.61 Lakhs’.
  2. Purchase Manual/Purchase Rules of DRDO that were used for Procurement of Printed Journals in year 2011 & 2012 at DMSRDE, Kanpur.
  3. With reference to DMSRDE Tender Notice with Tender Number DMSRDE/12TIC009 with name of the item “Subscription (Yearly)   for Printed Journals Year 2012”  provide the following information:

i.            Copy of TPC/NC Minutes

ii.            Copy of Supply Order

iii.            The dates on which supply of printed journals received at  DMSRDE, Kanpur

iv.            Copies of bill submitted by Vendor/Supplier

  1. With reference to DMSRDE Tender Notice with Tender Number DMSRDE/11TIC009 with name of the item “Subscription (Yearly)   for Printed Journals Year 2011”  provide the following information:

i.            Copy of TPC/NC Minutes

ii.            Copy of Supply Order

iii.            The dates on which supply of printed journals received at  DMSRDE, Kanpur

iv.            Copies of bill submitted by Vendor/Supplier

  1. Justification/Reasons for delayed supply of Printed Journals in Year 2011 & 2012.
  2. Whether Scientific/Technical projects/assignments/work of DMSRDE affected by delayed supply of Printed Journals in the year 2011 & 2012.

The information sought pertains to Purchase Matter of Printed Journal and as such not exempted u/s (24) of RTI Act 2005.

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/2014/60443

Drdo, Uncategorized

First Appeal – Private Cars Using Commercial Purpose – DMSRDE

2 Comments

FIRST APPEAL U/S 19(1) OF Right to Information Act, 2005

To,
Dr Lokendra Singh,
OS & Sceintist ‘H’
First Appellate Authority, DRDO
RTI Cell, Room No. 314 – A/A,
DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg,
New Delhi-110105

Subject: First Appeal under Section 19(1) of RTI Act 2005

Reference:  Letter No. DMS/0369/RTI/R/2013/0029 dated 14 Nov 2013 issued by CPIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur

Sir,

I am distressed by above referred decision of Central Public Information Officer, DMSRDE, Kanpur. I hereby submit this appeal u/s 19(1) of RTI Act 2005 for your kind consideration & decision.

1.       Details of appellant:-

Name           Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal
Address       21-Sunderwala, Raipur
Dehradun-248008, Uttarakhand                    

2.       Details of Central Public Information Officer (CPIO):-

Name & Rank       Shri Sarvesh Kumar , Scientist ‘F ‘
Address                 DMSRDE, GT Road, Kanpur-208013

3. Particulars of Decision/Order of CPIO against which appeal:-

Decision vide letter No. DMS/0369/RTI/R/2013/0029 dated 14th  Nov 2013 received by appellant on 24 November 2013. Copy enclosed as Enclosure -1.

4. Facts & Grounds leading to appeal:

(a)  An application under Section 6(1) of RTI Act 2005 dated 23rd October 2013 was submitted to CPIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur for providing information regarding “Private cars with registration No. UP78 BS 1144 and UP78 CP 6510 using DMSRDE for commercial purpose”. Copy of the RTI Application dated 23rd October 2013 is enclosed as Enclosure-2.

(b)  Central Public Information Officer, DMSRDE, Kanpur rejected the application u/s 24(1) of RTI Act 2005 vide letter No. DMS/0369/RTI/R/2013/0029 dated 14th November 2013 although it was clearly mentioned in RTI application that required information is directly related to the allegations of Corruption and not come under Schedule-II. However CPIO replied in the highly irresponsible manner which indicates the mismanagement and Corruption in DMSRDE.

(c)  It was clearly mentioned in RTI application dated 23rd October 2013 that “Central Information Commission in its various decisions consistently held that establishment matters relating to the organization notified u/s 24 of the RTI Act come within the purview of the Act and information in this regard thereto are not exempted from disclosure. For examples decision pronounced in F. No. CIC/LS/A/2010/000107 dated 26.4.2010 and in F. No.CIC/SM/C/2008/ 00054/LS dated 29.01.2010”.

(d)  In point d (1) of reply dated 14 Nov 2013, CPIO provided false argument. As per Purchase Management 2006 it is the responsibility of Director, DMSRDE to hire the transport services from that vendor, the vehicles of which are registered under Taxi at RTO. How can RTO know that a private car vehicle is being used for transport services at DMSRDE?

(e)  In point d (2) of reply dated 14 Nov 2013, CPIO gave false argument for not providing the information sought. Committee under Chairmanship of Dr. Ashok Ranjan, Scientist ‘F’ and four other members for identification of vendors did not perform their responsibilities properly. As per findings of the Committee 15 vendors were identified for hired transport services and out of which 10 vendors were qualified as per guidelines framed by the Committee. General terms and conditions were also framed on 18 points by Committee as Annexure II of proposal provided to vendors for seeking quotations for hired transport services. In point no. 8 of General terms & conditions framed by the Committee it was clearly mentioned that “The lowest quotation will be accepted. In case of more than one lowest quotation, the firm whose cars/vehicles registered at RTO for taxi will be preferred”. This indicates that it was responsibilities of DMSRDE to check the registration of taxies whether these were registered as taxies at RTO.

(f)   The arguments at point d (3) is again to put the responsibilities and accountability to minimize corruption in hiring of transport services , on the soldiers of local audit and test audit teams. In case both local & test audit teams were obliged by Director, DMSRDE   on cash & kind then how can they raise the objections on irregularities and corruptions in contract of hired transport. It is well known fact that hired vehicles are being provided to local audit personnel (ACDA officials) on 24×7 and one DMSRDE official is also posted at ACDA office to assist ACDA. These illegal obligations putted on ACDA by Director, DMSRDE establish Corruption in the whole process of contract of hired transport.

(g)  Contract given to M/s Super India Travels, Kanpur has been expired in July 2012 as contract was for only for one year and still now new contract has not been provided to any other vendor by the fresh tendering process as per Purchase Management 2006. One & half year extension to the same vendor smacks vested interest and leads Corruption.

(h) The vendor is not claiming service tax from DMSRDE; the vendor is not having service tax registration and not depositing service tax to Custom & Excise Department, Govt. of India. The issue of service tax registration is clearly mentioned in General terms and conditions framed by the committee so constituted by Director, DMSRDE. In point no. 17 of General terms & conditions framed by the committee it was clearly mentioned that “The rates quoted should be excluding the service tax. The service tax will be paid additionally only after receiving the proof of the service tax registration. No service tax will be paid if the operator fails to provide proof of valid service tax registration”.

(i)   Facts mentioned at above establish irregularities in giving contracts to M/s Super India Travels, Kanpur and further illegal extension since one and half year indicates Corruption at DMSRDE, Kanpur in the whole process.

5.       Prayer /relief sought for:-

Information sought vides RTI Application dated 23 October 2013 by appellant has been denied on false and invalid reasons by CPIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur. Therefore, appellant kindly prays to FAA, DRDO to allow this appeal and issue instructions/orders to CPIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur to provide the information sought as seek by appellant vide his RTI Application dated 23rd  October 2013.

6.       Declaration:-

I hereby state that the information and particulars given above are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

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

 Enclosure: Two

(1)      Letter from CPIO, DMSRDE dated 14th  November 2013

(2)      RTI Application dated 23 October 2013

 
 RTI Application dated 23 October 2013
 
To,
Shri Sarvesh Kumar,
Central Public Information Officer,
DMSRDE, GT Road,
Kanpur-208013             

Subject: Application under Right to Information Act 2005

Hello,

Kindly refer to following decisions of Central Information Commission and verdict given thereof in these decisions.

  1. 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”.
  2. CIC/LS/A/2010/000107 dated 26.4.2010 (Ms. K. Surya Kumari Vs DRDO)
  3. CIC/SM/C/2008/00054/LS dated 29.01.2010 (Shri Prabhat Vs DRDO)
  4. CIC/LS/A/2012/002487 dated 31.12.2012 ( Ms. Savitha Vs DRDO)

CIC in its above mentioned decisions consistently held that Establishment Matters relating to the organization notified u/s 24 of the RTI Act come within the purview of the Act and information in this regard thereto are not exempted from disclosure.

In light of the above decisions of CIC, Kindly provide the following information under RTI Act 2005.

INFORMATION SOUGHT

  1. Total No.  of transport/vehicles available in MT Division DMSRDE.
  2. Provide following information in respect of all vehicles available in DMSRDE.
  1. Type of vehicle, Brand name, Manufacturer
  2. Date of Purchase, purchase cost and source of fund(Build up/Project etc)
  3. Present depreciated cost as on 31.10.2013
  4. Average distance run /traveled by each vehicle in the year 2012-2013 separately for
  5. each vehicle.
  6. Total expenditure on maintenance of each vehicle separately in the year 2011-2012 and 2012-2013.

3.      How many CMTD /MTD are posted in MT Division?
4.      Mode of tendering for selection of vendors for hired vehicles (Local Board/Single                  Tender/Limited Tender/Open Tender/Repeat Order) for the following years.

  1. 2010-2011
  2. 2011-2012
  3. 2012-2013
  4. 2013-2014

5.     Total budget of MT Division years 2010-2011, 2011-2012 and 2012-13.
6.     Total expenditure and payment made for hired vehicles/transport for the years 2010-2011, 2011-2012 and 2012-13 along with name of vendor to whom the payment made.
7.      Provide expenditure incurred on various heads for the years 2010-2011, 2011-2012 and 2012-13.
8.      Provide information about vendor/firm which got contract for hired vehicles and amount paid to these vendors in following format

9.      Amount of Service Tax that has been paid by DMSRDE to Vendor as reflected in bills submitted by vendor for depositing in Custom, Excise & Service Tax Department in

following format

  1. Provide copies of CST (Comparative Statement) after opening of quotations duly approved by competent authority for the years 2011-2012, 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 for giving contract to vendors for hired vehicles services in DMSRDE.
  2. Provide copy of supply order placed for hiring private vehicles/transport for the FY   2011-2012, 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 in DMSRDE.
  3. Copy of contract with terms & condition and rate (usage charges) for the year 2012-2013 and 2013-2014.
  4. Whether any extension of contract for hired vehicle has been given to any vendor for during the years 2012-2013 and 2013-2014. (Yes/No)
  5. If answer to point (13) is yes then provide copy of rules under PM 2006 by which extension for contract of hired vehicle services (Repeat Order) could be given to vendor without going in fresh bidding.
  6. Details about maintenance of vehicles/transport available in DMSRDE for each vehicle/transport in following format
  1.  Status of vehicle (operational/Non operational) available in DMSRDE when services of hired vehicles were utilized.
  2. Whether hired vehicles provided by vendor Super India Travels, Rama Devi, Kanpur with following registration number are registered at RTO, Kanpur under category of Taxi for commercial purposes. Registration & Details of vehicles are

(a)   UP78 BS 1144 ( Indica Car White Color with white number plate)

(b)   UP78 CP 6510 (Indigo CS White Car with white number plate)

  1. If answer to point (17) is Yes then provide copy of registration certificate issued by RTO Kanpur for said vehicles under Taxi for Commercial purpose.
  2. If answer to point (17) is No then provide the grounds on which vendor not having proper registration under Taxi from RTO, Kanpur was allowed to provide services in DMSDRE.
  3. The details of Vendor Registration Committee at DMSRDE with name & designation of Chairman and members.

The color of the number plates used in cars with registration No. UP78 BS 1144 and UP78 CP 6510 provided by vendor for hired services are not Yellow. The color of these no. plates are White. It establishes that cars used for hired transport in DMSRDE are not registered under TAXI FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSE. Also the said vendor is not registered at Custom & Excise Department under Service Tax category and not depositing any Service Tax for hired vehicles services at DMSRDE.

Therefore the Information Sought is pertaining to Allegations of Corruption and as such not exempted u/s 24 of the RTI Act 2005.

The information sought in this RTI Application is on Establishment Matter and as such not exempted u/s 24 of the RTI Act.

An IPO of Rs. 10/- as application fee (IPO No. 17F 549289) is annexed as Annexure-1.

 
 
(Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal)           Date: 23 October, 2013                                                       
21-Sunderwala, Raipur
Dehradun-248008
Uttarakhand                    

Annexure:-

  1. IPO of Rs. 10/- , with IPO No.   17F 549289   as application Fee.dmsrde rti reply car
Drdo

RTI- SASE – DRDO

Leave a comment
To,
Central Public Information Officer
Snow & Avalanche Study Establishment (SASE),DRDO, Min of Def
Him Parisar, Sec 37-A
Chandigarh-160036                               

Hello,

Mr. Arun Kumar Singh, Scientist ‘C’ was posted to SASE, Chandigarh from the August 2004-Feb 2009. He was directly recruited at the post of Scientist ‘C’ in DRDO and posted at SASE, Chandigarh. Kindly provide the following information u/s 6(1) of RTI Act 2005.

INFORMATION SOUGHT

  1. Provide the following information in respect of procurement cases indented by Mr. Arun Kumar Singh, Scientist ‘C’ at SASE during the period 2004-2009.
  2. Whether CAD Centre/Facility exists in SASE, Chandigarh. (Yes/No)
  3. If answer to point (2) is yes then provide the following information.
  1. Copies of all demands in form DRDO.MM.06 indented.
  2. Copies of Supply Orders issued by Director, SASE for all demands indented by Mr. Arun Kumar Singh, Scientist ‘C’.
  3. Copies of RIN/Installation report for all items indented.
  1. Year of creation of CAD Centre/Facility.
  2. Total expenditure incurred upon creation of CAD Centre/Facility.
  3. Expenditure incurred towards civil work for creation of CAD Facility.
  4. Name of agency (MES/CCE (R&D)/Director SASE) that executed the civil works in creation of CAD Centre.
  5. Officer who indented the cases of civil work for creation of CAD facility.
  6. Details of Software, Workstations/Computers, Plotter, Printers etc equipment purchased in CAD Facility with item nomenclature and cost.

The information related to purchase, supply orders, bills etc. has already been allowed by FAA, DRDO vide his decision No. RTI/02/2091/F/2013/0142 dated 14 October 2013.

This is to inform that Central Information Commission in its various decisions consistently held that establishment matters relating to the organization notified u/s 24 of the RTI Act come within the purview of the Act and information in this regard thereto are not exempted from disclosure.

Besides purchase and establishment matter the information sought is pertaining to allegations of Corruption and as such not exempted u/s 24 of RTI Act 2005.

Regards

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

Registration Number MODEF/R/2013/61143

Drdo

RTI- DMSRDE – M/s Manglam Traders, Kanpur

Leave a comment
To,
Shri Sarvesh Kumar
Scientist ‘F’
Central Public Information Officer
DMSRDE, GT Road
Kanpur-208013

                    Subject: Application under Right to Information Act 2005

Sir,

Kindly provide the following information u/s 6(1) of RTI Act 2005.

INFORMATION SOUGHT

  1. Provide the following information in respect of Tender Reference No. DMSRDE/13552064 published on website of DRDO.(Copy Enclosed)
    1. Comparative Statement of Tender duly approved by SPC and Director.
    2. Name of vendor/firm/trader (L1) to which Supply Order was issued.
    3. Provide copy of supply order issued against this tender enquiry.

    Cost of the material purchased against supply order under above mentioned tender reference

  2. Provide following information in respect of business carried out by M/s Manglam Traders, Kanpur in DMSRDE, Kanpur.
    1. Registration Certificate issued to M/s Manglam Traders, Kanpur by DMSRDE, Kanpur.
    2. As per provisions of Rule 3.2 of Purchase Management 2006 of DRDO in which  categories of stores, e.g., raw materials, chemicals, machine tools, instruments, electronics and electrical items, timber, fabrication jobs and other general stores etc., the M/s Manglam Traders, Kanpur is registered in DMSRDE, Kanpur.
    3. Total cost of supply orders placed in the year 2009 and 2010.
    4. Total cost of supply orders placed from 1st January 2011 to 31st October 2013.
    5. Copies of supply orders placed to Manglam Traders from 01.01.2011 to 31.10.2013.
    6. Number of repeat order placed to Manglam Traders and copies of  supply orders issued for repeat order
  3. Provide the copy of supply order placed against DMSRDE Case No. 13PDD014 dated 25.04.2012 initiated by Production Division.
  4. Provide amount in Kg of Polydimethylsilane(PDMS) purchased in the period.
    1. 01.01.2009 to 31.12.2010
    2. 01.01.2011 to 31.10.2013
    3. Likely to be purchased(Supply Order placed)
  5. Copies of bills submitted by M/s Manglam Traders to DMSRDE, Kanpur against supply orders and repeat orders placed to M/s Manglam Traders, Kanpur.

The information related to purchase, supply orders, bills etc. has already been allowed by FAA, DRDO vide his decision No. RTI/02/2091/F/2013/0142 dated 14 October 2013 in First Appeal No. 142 on First Appeal of applicant.

This is to inform that Central Information Commission in its various decisions consistently held that establishment matters relating to the organization notified u/s 24 of the RTI Act come within the purview of the Act and information in this regard thereto are not exempted from disclosure.

Besides purchase and establishment matter the information sought is pertaining to allegations of Corruption and as such not exempted u/s 24 of RTI Act 2005.

An IPO of Rs. 10/- as application fee (IPO No. 17F548630 ) is enclosed as Annexure-1.

Date: 10 November, 2013                                                

(Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal)
 21-Sunderwala, Raipur
 Dehradun-248008
Uttarakhand                     

Annexure:-

  1. 1.    IPO of Rs. 10/- , with IPO No. 17F548630 as application Fee.                
Drdo

CIC Decision on DRDO Corruption & Nepotism – 4

1 Comment

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 308, B-Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066

File No.CIC/LS/A/2012/001190

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 submits that there are a large number of senior scientists who have lived or are living in Government guest houses and yet claiming House Rent Allowance which is contrary to the rules. Thus, they are defrauding the Government. He provides a list of such scientists which is as follows :-

1. Dr. Prahlada, Chief Controller(R&D);
2. Sh. S. Sundaresh, Chief Controller(R&D);
3. Dr. K. Sekhar, Chief Controller(R&D);
4. Dr. r. Sreehari Rao, Chief Controller(R&D);
5. Dr. K.D. Nayak, Chief Controller(R&D);
6. Shri Ravi, Scientist ‘G’, CPIO;
7. Shri S. Sankaran, Director, ER&IPR;
8. Sh. H.V. Ssrinivasa Rao, Director, ISSA;
9. Sh. Ajay Ssingh, Chief Executive;
10. Sh. S. Shanker, Director, DCV&E;
11. Shri R.C. Katoch, Chief Tech Examiner;
12. Sh. B. Choubey, CCE and
13. Sh. Abhay Kumar, CCE.

3. He also produces a copy of the letter dated 17.8.2011 of Dr. Arun Kumar, Director of Personnel, wherein orders for recovery were made. The said letter, addressed to the Directors of all Labs/Establishments for recovery of HRA is reproduced below :-

4. “1. It has been observed that some officers posted to a Lab have stayed/are
staying in DRDO transit facilities/Guest house from the date of their reporting to that station Officers, if have stayed/staying in the DRDO transit facilities/Guest house for more than a month and have simultaneously claimed /claiming HRA for the said period of stay, is against govt. orders/regulations.

2. In view of the above, officers posted at any station who have stayed/staying in
DRDO transit facilities/Guest house for a month or more from their date of reporting and also have claimed/claiming HRA for the said period are required to refund the amount of HRA wrongly claimed forthwith by 15 Sep 2011 through MRO under intimation to the undersigned.
4. This has the approval of the competent authority.

5. The contents of this letter may please be communicated to all concerned.” He wishes to know as to why no recoveries have been effected so far.

6. To this, Shri Mishra would respond that recoveries have been made from all of the scientists.

7. In my opinion, this does not mitigate the irregularity committed in claiming HRA by the above named scientists. Even so, it is to be noted that recoveries have been made from all concerned. If so, the appellant may be informed accordingly in 03 weeks.

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. Shri Rajiv Chauhan,
1053/3, Shastri Nagar,
Meerut-250005.

The Right to Information Act, 2005

Appeal before the Central Information Commission;

Appeal No. ———————– Dated ————————
As I am aggrieved by decision of Central Public Information Officer and First Appellate

Authority, I hereby file this appeal for your kind decision.
1. Details of appellant:

1.1 Full Name: – RAJIV CHAUHAN

1.2. Full Address: R/O-1053/3, SHASTRI NAGAR, MEERUT (U.P)-250005

1.3 Phone/Cell No.: 09412628314 ; 09258045938 ; 0121-4009512;

4 Email ID: rajivchauhan89@yahoo.co.in

2. Details of Central Public Information Officer (CPIO):

2.1 Name/Designation: Dr.A.K.TYAGI ; SCIENTIST “F’ , CPIO, DRDO HQ;

2.2 Full Address: 314-A, “B’ BLOCK, DRDO BHAWAN, NEW DELHI-110105

2.3 Name of Public Authority: DRDO, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE.

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: — 17 DEC 2011

5. Particulars of Decisions:

5.1 Reference No & Date of CPIO Decision:-

30 NOV2011; RTI/01/2091/P/2011/0278; CPIO.DRDO HQ; NEW DELHI

5.2 Reference No & Date of FAA’s Decision:-

20 JAN 2012; RTI/02/2091/F/2011/121;

6. Dates of receipt of replies by appellant from:-

6.1 CPIO— 07 DEC 2011

6.2 FAA: — 27 JAN 2012
7. Details of information sought:-

Kindly inform to you that DRDO; Director of Personnel for DG(R&D) issued a recovery of HRA letter no-DOP/03/31000/M/05 DT-17 Aug.2011 that “It has been observed that some officers posted to a lab have stayed / are staying in DRDO transit facilities / Guest house from the date of their reporting to that station. Officers, if have stayed / staying in the DRDO transit facilities / Guest house for more than a month and have simultaneously claimed / claiming HRA for the said period of stay, is against govt orders / regulations.” It seems that a financial irregularity are carried out by the officers / scientist in DRDO. 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/ Commissions / High Courts in the interest of law and justice. I hereby enclosed all related documents for your consideration and action. I want the following information’s as under-

S.No INFORMATION SOUGHT REPLY
1. Pl. provide name of the officers / scientist who availed the facility of the guest house and get / benefited with HRA before issue this above noted letter of DRDO. Pl. provide name of the officers/ scientist.

2. Pl. provide name of the officers / scientist who availed the facility of the guest house and get / benefited with HRA and after issue this above noted letter of DRDO deposited / returned the HRA. Pl. provide name of the officers/ scientist.

3. After knowing this financial irregularity / cheating by the officers / scientist, has DRDO taken any action against the corrupt officers as per the law / CCS conduct rule. Pl provide authentic reply.

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 for HRA benefits in their own financial interest after corrupt practices because “ It has been observed that some officers posted to a lab have stayed / are staying in DRDO transit facilities / Guest house from the date of their reporting to that station. Officers, if have stayed / staying in the DRDO transit facilities / Guest house for more than a month and have simultaneously claimed / claiming HRA for the said period of stay, is against govt orders / regulations.” So that financial losses occurred to govt. funds by the corrupt officers / scientists. 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 his reply FAA mislead to me with the reference of Supreme Court civil Appeal no – 6454. However in this 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 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 Director of Personnel for DG(R&D) issued a recovery of HRA letter no-DOP/03/31000/M/05 DT-17 Aug.2011 . It seems that a financial irregularity are carried out by the officers / scientist in DRDO. So that financial losses occurred to govt. funds by the corrupt officers / scientists.

2- 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:-

CPIO reply against the CIC decision dt-29 Jun 2011on file no-CIC/LS/A/2011/000412 is a clear cut evidence in support of my RTI application related with corruption.(Encl)

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. Pl. provide name of the officers / scientist who availed the facility of the guest house and get / benefited with HRA before issue this above noted letter of DRDO. Pl. provide name of the officers/ scientist.

2. Pl. provide name of the officers / scientist who availed the facility of the guest house and get / benefited with HRA and after issue this above noted letter of DRDO deposited / returned the HRA. Pl. provide name of the officers/ scientist.
3. After knowing this financial irregularity / cheating by the officers / scientist, has DRDO taken any action against the corrupt officers as per the law / CCS conduct rule. Pl provide authentic reply.

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

Drdo

FAA Reply for SF Jagdalpur RTI Appeal

4 Comments

28th October 2011

Dear SFcian friends from Jagdalpur,

After receiving of the denial of RTI request by CPIO, DRDO, I appealed the matter to Appellate Authority as expected by us the denial of Appellate Authority, DRDO received by me.

As you already know about Dr Arun Kumar, DOP, DRDO, he is the one of the most corrupt official of DRDO and he is the total responsible for downfall of the DRDO. He is the man behind the all manipulations to uplift the incompetent and corrupt  officials of DRDO, their promotions, their posting, their extensions, their illegal financial benefits all matters are taken care by Dr Arun Kumar but question is up to which date because everyone very well know if somebody doing illegal activities it is limit and one has pay for that.

Since the website completed 17 months and in this period I have come across only one good act of Dr Arun Kumar, DOP that is the transfer of two blinds Sh Laxman, Admin Assistant, ACEM, Nasik & Sh Ravindra Gauda, HEMRL, Pune to their hometowns lab, but it was after the pressure of Sh Rajiv Varshnay, SA’s staff officer only. I want to thanks both of them for this noble cause.

I am requested Dr Arun Kumar please act for some good cause in last step of your service, so people will forget wrong doings.

After few months when you will retire no one can even like to say hello to you.

Dear SFcians pleas find below their denial of DRDO, but we will take up this matter to CIC soon and will get proper and legal solutions for issues.

Some important question

  1. The copy of fitness certificates of those vehicles which carries the employees daily to Girola plant site from SF Complex from competent authority.
  2. The copies of movement order of transports which carries the employees daily to Girola plant site from SF Complex from 1/7/2011 to 15/07/2011

Whether Above info is nature of strategic?

Since they have already  “One example: one of the scientists, named Shri Kushal Sahoo, was killed in an accident near Bakawand last year while returning from the Girola site to Jagdalpur in Bolero vehicle. Bakawand police station filed FIR and accident report (can refer the same with the police station). When settling the case the DRDO HQs asked the official movement order to consider it as death while performing duty. As the movement order was not issued actually for him and few more travelling in the same vehicle they were also injured, management of SF Complex made a statement of case stating that “Kusahl Sahoo is travelling for the purpose of meeting at Airport Terminal Building, Jagdalpur office”.

I really don’t our honorable SA put these inhuman persons in such important posts.

Thanking you

Regards 

Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun 248008
Phone – 0135-2787750, Mobile,  9411114879
E-mail id prabhu@dandriyal.com Website –  www.corruptionindrdo.com/

Enclosed

1. My appeal to  Appellate Authority, DRDO

2. FAA Reply for SF Jagdalpur RTI Appeal

The Right to Information Act, 2005

First Appeal for Central Govt.

I.D. No_________ Date: _________ [For office use]To                                                                                                                   
Dr Arun Kumar
OS & Director, Directorate of Personal
Room No.-217, DRDO Bhawan , Rajaji Marg
New Delhi – 110105

Sir,
As I am aggrieved by decision/no decision of Central Public Information Officer, I hereby file this appeal for your kind decision.

The reply of CPIO, DRDO, is completely confusing, misleading, incorrect, unjustified and willful not give any information, does not following the spirit of RTI Act 2005.

The information asked about SF Complex Jagdalpur is not come any norms of secrecy. I am not asking about any work or project information of SF Jagdalpur Unit.

1. Details of appellant
1.1       Full Name:                  Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal
1.2.      Full Address:               21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun-248008
1.3       Phone/Cell No.            0135-2787750 / 919411114879
1.4       Email ID:                     prabhu@dandriyal.com
2. Details of CPIO:
2.1 Name/Designation:           Dr A K Tyagi, CPIO, Head RTI Cell, Scientist ‘F’
2.2 Full Address :                    Room No 314 A, DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg, New Delhi -110105
2.3 Name of Public Authority: DRDO, Ministry of Defence, Government of India

3. Details of RTI application to CPIO:
Date of Application  : 19th July  2011
Mailed on:   19th July  2011
by  speed post

4. Particulars of payment of filing fee:
Paid Rs.10/- by   Postal Order No. 90E 611227

5. Details of information sought:

1)      The official address of SF Complex (one of the labs/Establishment of DRDO), JAGDALPUR?

2)       Copy of D O part order or any other order regarding the place of reporting duty at Plant Girola Village which is 40 Kms away from Jagdalpur.

3)            Copy of   D O part order any other order in which the employees posted at SF complex first they report to duty at SF Complex then report for duty at Girola Plant Site.

4)      The copies of movement order of transports which carries the employees daily to Girola plant site from SF Complex from 1/7/2011 to 15/07/2011

5)    The copy of fitness certificates of those vehicles which carries the employees daily to Girola plant site from SF Complex from competent authority.

Note: above required information is directly related to corruption and human right not come under schedule -II – why because it is noticed that without proper movement orders and without proper maintained vehicles the employees of SF complex are going daily at Girola plant. Earlier in one accident case it is heard that the movement order was made by SF Complex administration in back date to give financial benefits to the deceased family.

6. Particulars of Decision of CPIO:

Date of CPIO’s  Decision:9th August 2011

Date of receipt of decision by the appellant:12th August 2011

7. Brief facts of the case: 

The official address of SF Complex is “SF COMPLEX, AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING, JAGDALPUR-494001”. SFC Employees are given appointment letters with above address as reporting place. But, all are forced to report at the above address as well as at its work centre located at Girola village, Bakawand block, Bastar district. This location is completely out of 40 Kms away from municipality (Jagdalpur) of the official address.

As per rule they should report at the place of posting as per the appointment letter. But it is not so. Is it (forcing to report at other place) not violation of an employee’s right to report at the posting place? The management says that reporting place is at Girola and same time management says Airport terminal building, Jagdalpur. It is clear cut case of harassment of employees of SF Complex.

One example: one of the scientists, named Shri Kushal Sahoo, was killed in an accident near Bakawand last year while returning from the Girola site to Jagdalpur in Bolero vehicle. Bakawand police station filed FIR and accident report (can refer the same with the police station). When settling the case the DRDO HQs asked the official movement order to consider it as death while performing duty. As the movement order was not issued actually for him and few more travelling in the same vehicle they were also injured, management of SF Complex made a statement of case stating that “Kusahl Sahoo is travelling for the purpose of meeting at Airport Terminal Building, Jagdalpur office”.

If the travelling from Jagdalpur to Girola and back is official and as per the rule and the rule position should be clear for all for management, employees and the general public. After this accident all the staff of SF Complex Jagdalpur took a decision and reported at posting place only. This happened for two days and later management has interfered and threatened to them for report at Girola and told them if they will not report at Girola, will get termination letter.  Employees were forced to report at Girola. It is a violation of Human Right? Reporting at posting place is not correct? Then why appointment letters were given like that?  DRDO has to duty to provide them proper necessary papers as per rule position of Central Government.

The requested information is not come under 8(1) (a) and 24 (1) of the RTI Act at all because the information asked not in the nature of secrecy like The copy of fitness certificates of those vehicles which carries the employees daily to Girola plant site from SF Complex from competent authority. This the major concern of family and friends of employees of SF complex for their safety and well beings. For mere few thousand Rupees from contractors as bribe the Top DRDO officials playing with the life of SF Complex Employees.

The required information is fall under corruption and as well as violation human right and therefore in any means it is not come under schedule –II exemption of RTI Act 2005.

“RTI is a key instrument for imposing democratic values, accountability and transparency in our public administration,” Dr.Shah Faisal (IAS topper 2010 & RTI activist of J&K RTI Movement NGO) told Sakàl Times

 
8. Reasons/grounds for this appeal:
i)     To know the sensitiveness and work environment of DRDO

ii)     To expose the corrupt practices prevailing in DRDO

9. Any other information in support of appeal: 

10. Prayer/relief sought for: 

It is requested that please provide me correct information as per request of my RTI dated 19th   July 2011   in larger public interest, because it is directly related to corruption and violation of Human rights.

11. Enclosures: 

i)              My RTI request dated  19th July 2011

ii)              Denial of CPIO, DRDO Hqrs dated 09 August 2011

12. 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 any information commission nor is pending with any Court or tribunal or authority.Regards

 

Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun-248008
Phone – 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,
e-mail id prabhu@dandriyal.com website www.corruptionindrdo.com
Denial of Appellate Authority page 1
Denial of Appellate Authority page 2