Tag Archives: GOI

RTI – Farzi extension because DRDO scientists not having international stature which is the essential criteria for service extension as per GOI

To                                                                                  30th July 2014
Sh B.Bandopadhyay
CPIO & Under secretary, (Estt.A-IV),
R.No.202, North Block , 
Department of Personnel & Training, (DOPT),
New Delhi-110001

Hello,

Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 in respect of FR 56 (d). Fundamental Rules (FR) are statutory rules framed in exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution, by the President.

There is provision to grant extension in the service beyond the age of superannuation under the 2nd and 3rd provision of FR 56(d).

DOPT vide OM No. No. 26012/6/2002-Estt. (A) Dated 9th December 2002, fixed the Proforma for sending proposals for approval of Department of Personnel & Training for grant of extension to Government servants beyond the age of superannuation.

It has been observed that DRDO is not adherence to this Proforma for sending the proposals to DOPT and using a different Proforma having 10 points only while Proforma set by DOPT is having 13 points. (Copy of both DOPT & DRDO Proforma are enclosed for ready reference).

DOPT is also accepting the proposals of DRDO in another Performa framed by DRDO itself which left very vital information in its Proforma.

Kindly provide the following information under RTI Act 2005.

  1. Sri P. S. Subramanyam, Director of Aeronautical Development Agency (born 28.06.1950) was on extension up to 64 years till 30 June 2014. Government of India has given one more year extension to him beyond the age of 64. Provide copy of File Noting of Screening Committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary and File Noting of Appointment Committee of Cabinet (ACC) for granting the extension in service after superannuation age of 64 years to him.
  2. Copy of service extension rules / provisions of which service may be granted by Government of India to a Scientist working under Central Government beyond the age of 64 years.
  3. DRDO sending proposals for approval of Department of Personnel & Training for grant of extension to Government servants beyond the age of superannuation with their own performa other then FR 56 (d) provide the copy of approval of competent authority for DRDO performa.
  4. As per provision to Article 309 of the Constitutionno organization having no power to amend Statutory Fundamental Rules. Provide the grounds on basis of which DOPT is accepting the proposals in modified Proforma of DRDO.
  5. Number of posts of Distinguished Scientist fixed by the Government in DRDO.
Regards
Prabhu  Dandriyal
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun-248008
Phone – 0135- 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,
e-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com  website – www.corruptionindrdo.com

Enclosed : FR 56 (d) Performa of DOPT and DRDO Performa

  Registration Number          DOP&T/R/2014/62698

FR 56 (d) Performa of DOPT and DRDO Performa
FR 56 (d) Performa of DOPT and DRDO Performa

Implementation of IPR Information System in DRDO – is it exempted organisation for all GOI orders ?

To                                                                                                          28th July 2014
Hon’ble
Shri Narendra Modi
Prime Minister
Room No. 152, PMO
South Block,
New Delhi-110011

Subject

  1. Non-Implementation of DOPT, Govt. of India, Office Memorandums regarding submission of IPR and put the same in Public Domain in Defence Research & Development Organisation, Min. of Defence
  2. Implementation of IPR Information System in DRDO

Hon’ble Sir,

Good Governance is core issue for Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). One aspect of Good Governanceis defined as “Our model of good governance ensures that even the tallest leaders and top bureaucrats are answerable to an ordinary citizen, hailing from any part of India. The Government believes in operating in complete transparency, with every file andofficial record open for public scrutiny, except when these may endanger national security” on BJP website

Main characteristics of Good Governance are Transparency, Accountability and Zero tolerance for Corruption-Eradication of Corruption and Rule of Law.

Sir, I would like to quote your message “Lack of good governance is like diabetes which affects each and every part of the body” and “We did not get surajya (good governance) after swaraj (independence)”.

In ceremony of release of BJP Manifesto you told “DO MOOL BATON KO LEKAR HUM AAGE BADH RAHE HAIN”- First is Good Governance and second is Development.

Sir, very humbly I would quote the News – On June 4, as Prime Minister Narendra Modi met all his 77 secretaries at his 7, Race Course Road residence with a call forsuggestions. “Tell me how to run my Government“.

As a matter of fact, you might agree that Government Servants are backbone of Government System and without support of them Government can’t function, as evident form your statement to secretaries of Government of India.

Sir, It is general perception today that “Corruption is a Termite for India”. Corruption is the abuse of entrusted power for private gain. Corruption whether in cash or kind lead generation to black money? The major source of investment of black money is immovable property as lack of implementation of transparency system in records of immovable property, it is very difficult to search & assess the value of immovable property whether declared or non-declared by an individual.

Government Employees are bound by two statutory rules, one for conduct (CCS (Conduct) Rules 1964) and other for discipline (CCS (CCA) Rules 1965).

Government felt that all Government Officers (Group ‘A’) should declare their IPR regularly every year under the provisions of Rule 18(1) (ii) of CCS (Conduct) Rules 1964.  Therefore, DOPT, Government of India issued various Office Memorandums to all Ministries/Departments/Organisations under Central Government regarding submission of IPR and place the same in Public Domain. These OMs are as follows:

i.    N0.11013/3/2011-Estt.A dated 11th April 2011

ii.    NO. 11013/3/2011-Estt. (A) dated 23 May 2011

iii.    F.No. 11013/3i2011-Estt. (A) dated 8th June 2011

iv.    F.No. 110131312011-Estt.(A) dated 23rd September 2013

In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 59 of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, the Government of India has notified the rules to provide for furnishing of information and annual return containing declaration of assets and liabilities by public servants as on 31st day of March every year, to the competent authority. Copy of the DO Letter D.O. No. 5(1)/2014 – EO (PR) dated 25th July 2014 issued by DOPT is annexed.

DOPT implemented these OMs fully for IAS and other cadres directly under it and put IPR of all officers in prescribed form for IPR issued by DOPT. Software known as IAS Officer’s IPR Information System also uploaded on DOPT website by which every citizen can get the latest signed and duly filled copy IPR 2013 in prescribed Performa issued by DOPT. Recently DOPT is going to upload its latest developed software “Property Related Information System (PRISM)” by 01.08 2014 for online uploading of assets and liabilities.

DOPT issued a prescribed format for declaration of Immovable Property by Government Officers. Copy of the IPR form is annexed. Most of the Ministries/Departments/Organisations under Central Government implemented the OMs of DOPT regarding placing of IPR in public domain by updating every year and recent IPR 2013 is available on websites of these Ministries/Departments/Organisations.

Sir, recently you also asked your ministers to submit property details to by July-end despite they have already declared their assets to Election Commission in the recent elections in 2014.This shows your commitment towards Transparency and Anti-Corruption in Government of India.

Despite all facts narrated above, there is one organisation under Ministry of Defence that has assumed that it is exempted from rules framed by DOPT, Government of India.This organisation is Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO).

This organisation is having a budget of approx. Rs. 11500 crore in Finance Bill 2014-15 out of which DRDO is spending 48-50% in procurement. So about Rs.5500 crore is being expenditure in procurements. The major source of corruption is procurement and best source for investment of back money is immovable property at manipulated cost.

Transparency and corruption are correlated like light and darkness. Simply where transparency is maintained there will be no corruption and where no transparency in the system then definitely corruption exists there. DRDO chief do not believe in transparency and rule of law the two main features of Good Governance. It can be simply established by non-placing IPR 2013 of 7500 Scientists of DRDO including Shri Avinash Chander and 11 Director General & Chief Controllers.

On perusal of DRDO website, I found surprising facts which stunned me and forced me to write irresponsible fact of DRDO to Hon’ble Prime Minister Sir. Since 2011 the IPRs of all DRDO Scientist including Shri Avinash Chander has not been updated. DRDO is grossly violating the DOPT; Government of India OMs regarding placing of every year updated IPR in public domain. Besides this DRDO is not using the prescribed Form of IPR specified by DOPT and not placed copies of these IPR 2013 duly signed by individuals on its website?

Sri Avinash Chander chief of DRDO is holding the three posts under Government of India viz DGR&D, Scientific Advisor to Raksha Mantri and Secretary, Defence R&D. Why he is not maintaining transparency and Rule of law in IPR matter in DRDO? The answer is quite understandable in light of above narrated facts. Besides Sri Avinash Chander, Dr. A.K. Singh, Director, Directorate of Personnel (DOP) is fully responsible for such kind of wilful and gross negligence in non-implementation of Government of India orders regarding placing of IPR 2013 in public domain in prescribed Performa.

Sir, for your kind perusal following documents is annexed as follows:

i.        IPR Form issued by DOPT.

ii.        Snaps of IAS IPR Information System.

iii.        IPR details of Sri Avinash Chander, Secretary, DR&Dand SA to RM, Dr. V. Bhujanaga Rao, DG (NS&M) and Dr. A.K. Singh, Director, DOP of 2011 in tabular form available on DRDO website. (Not in DOPT IPR Form)

Sir, non-transparency indicates corruption in the organisation. So I humbly request you to take stern action against the officers in DRDO responsible for such kind of gross violation of Government of India orders & policies for Good Governance and give directive to Sri Avinash Chander, DGR&D and Scientific Advisor to Raksha Mantri, Secretary, DRD for managing to upload the IPR 2013 of all 7500 Scientists of DRDO and implementation of IPR Information System of DOPT in DRDO.

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

Copy to:

  1. Hon’ble Defence Minister, Ministry of Defnce, South Block, New Delhi
  2. Hon’ble Minister of State, Min. of Personnel, PG & Pensions, North Block, New Delhi.
LIST OF ANNEXURES
i.    N0.11013/3/2011-Estt.A dated 11th April 2011
ii.    NO. 11013/3/2011-Estt. (A) dated 23 May 2011
iii.    F.No. 11013/3i2011-Estt. (A) dated 8th June 2011
iv.    F.No. 110131312011-Estt.(A) dated 23rd September 2013
v.    DO Letter D.O. No. 5(1)/2014 – EO (PR) dated 25th July 2014 of DOPT
vi.    IPR Form issued by DOPT.
vii.    Snaps of IAS IPR Information System
viii.    IPR 2011 of Sri Avinash Chander, Secretary, DRD& DGR&D, DRDO
ix.    IPR-2011 of Dr. V. BhujanagaRao, DG(NS&M), DRDO
x.    IPR-2011 of Dr. A.K. Singh, Director, DOP, DRDO
xi.    Budget of DRDO 2014-2015
DOPT-OM-N0.11013.-3-.2011-Estt.A-dated-11th-April-2011
DOPT-OM-N0.11013.-3-.2011-Estt.A-dated-11th-April-2011
DOPT OM NO. 11013/3/2011-Estt. (A) dated 23 May 2011
DOPT OM NO. 11013/3/2011-Estt. (A) dated 23 May 2011
DOPT F.No. 11013/3i2011-Estt. (A) dated 8th June 2011
DOPT F.No. 11013/3i2011-Estt. (A) dated 8th June 2011
DOPT F.No. 110131312011-Estt.(A) dated 23rd September 2013
DOPT F.No. 110131312011-Estt.(A) dated 23rd September 2013
DO Letter D.O. No. 5(1)/2014 - EO (PR) dated 25th July 2014 of DOPT
DO Letter D.O. No. 5(1)/2014 – EO (PR) dated 25th July 2014 of DOPT
 IPR Form issued by DOPT
IPR Form issued by DOPT
 Snaps of IAS IPR Information System
Snaps of IAS IPR Information System
 IPR 2011 of Sri Avinash Chander, Secretary, DRD& DGR&D, DRDO
IPR 2011 of Sri Avinash Chander, Secretary, DRD& DGR&D, DRDO
 IPR-2011 of Dr. V. Bhujanaga Rao, DG(NS&M), DRDO
IPR-2011 of Dr. V. Bhujanaga Rao, DG(NS&M), DRDO
 IPR-2011 of Dr. A.K. Singh, Director, DOP, DRDO
IPR-2011 of Dr. A.K. Singh, Director, DOP, DRDO
Budget of DRDO 2014-2015
Budget of DRDO 2014-2015

 

DRDO, DHRD working under pressure and not able to implement FCS guidelines and other corrective measures due to incompetent senior bosses

DRDS overall DRDO has misused, manipulated and override the Flexible Complimenting Scheme (FCS) guide lines issued by DoPT, GOI. Above graph showing the failure of DRDO, DHRD, total mismanaged the manpower growth, because of dummy RAC bosses and also because of absolute power of Lab Directors.

OM No. AB-14017/36/2011-Estt(RR) dated 21st September 2012 – “FCS should be rigorous with due emphasis on evaluation of scientific and technical knowledge so that only scientists who have to their credit demonstrable achievements or higher level of technical merit are recommended for promotion.”

The FCS guidelines which are not following by DRDO

ANNEXURE-I

Criteria for Identifying Institutions/Organizations as Scientific & Technical Institutions and definition of Activities and Services, Scientists & Engineers and Scientific Posts

(i)     The institutions referred to as S&T would be characterized by pursuit of excellence;

(ii)     They should be engaged in research, design, development or programme implementation (including review, analysis, promotion and aspects of science policy, etc.) which would cover a broad spectrum of pure and applied research but the essential feature would be innovative character and spirit of enquiry that permeates their overall functioning;

(iii)     The scientific culture is characterized by a few salient aspects, namely the persons involved are highly qualified and skilled technical personnel, involved in creative and innovative activity, they are willing to be judged on the basis of merit and competence rather than on the basis of seniority and a hierarchial structure;

(iv)              The criteria could cover the aims and objectives of the institution/ organization, qualifications of the personnel, qualitative requirements for performance of various types of activities, etc.

Scientific Activities and Services:

Scientific activities and Services covered for considering the applicability of the Flexible Complementing Scheme are as under:

(a)    Fundamental/basic research: Original investigation to gain new scientific knowledge, not necessarily directed towards any specific practical aim or application.

(b) Applied Research: Original investigation to gain new scientific or technical knowledge directed towards a specific practical aim or objective.

(c)            Experimental Development: Use of scientific knowledge directed towards producing new or substantially improved materials, devices, products, processes, systems or services.

(d)   S&T activities which are directly linked to R&D in terms of promoting the scientific activities and services.

 Scientists and Engineers: Persons

(a)    who possess academic qualification of atleast Master’s degree in Natural/Agricultural Sciences or Bachelor’s Degree in Engineering/Technology/Medicine; and

(b)   working in those capacities, us or create scientific knowledge, and engineering and technological principles, i.e. persons with scientific or technological training who are engaged in professional work on S&T activities, high level administrators and personnel who plan, direct or coordinate the execution of S&T activities.

Scientific Post is the one, the incumbent of which is a ‘Scientist or Engineer’ defined above in a scientific institution/organization declared as ‘Scientific Department’ as defined and is engaged in the generation, advancement, dissemination, and application of scientific and technical knowledge in the S&T activities.                                                                  ANNEXURE-II

CRITERIA FOR CONSIDERING PROMOTIONS UNDER FLEXIBLE COMPLEMENTING SCHEME

(a)        All officers will be first screened on the basis of gradings in the Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) for consideration for promotion; the ACRs should be assessed on a 10 point scale giving 10 marks for “outstanding”, 8 marks for “very good”, 6 marks for “good”, 4 marks for “average” and 0 for “poor” and only those officers who satisfy the minimum residency period linked to their performance as indicated in the table below be screened in.

Number of Year in grade              3              4              5              6              7              8

Scientist B to Scientist C             85%           80%        70%        65%       60%       

Scientist C to Scientist D                            85%        80%        75%        70%        60%

 Scientist D to Scientist E                            85%        80%        75%        70%        60%

Scientist E to Scientist F                                           85%        80%        75%        70%

 Scientist F to Scientist G                                         85%        80%        75%        70%

 Exceptionally meritorious candidates with all outstanding gradings  may be granted relaxation in the residency period, the relaxation being not more than one year on any single occasion.  Such a relaxation will be limited to a maximum of two occasions in their entire career.

 (b)        As the procedure adopted for assessment of CRs in various Scientific Departments differ at present, it has been decided that an external member, from Departments of Atomic Energy, Space or DRDO who have developed over the years a fine tuned system of screening in meritorious Scientists may be co-opted in the selection process, till such time a system gets established in other Scientific Departments.  The position will, however, be reviewed after 5 years from the date of issue of this Office Memorandum.

(c)        All officers who are screened-in will be called for an interview.  The performance in the interview will also be graded similarly on a 10 point scale and the eligibility for promotion will be based on the same norms as in the above Table.

 (d)        Field experience in research and development and/or experience in implementation of such scientific projects is compulsory for promotion of scientists recruited to the posts in the secretariat of the Scientific Ministries/Departments to higher grades under FCS.  Field experience of atleast 2 years and 5 years respectively will be essential for promotion to Scientist F and Scientist G grades respectively.  However, during the transitional period, Committee may relax this requirement in case of meritorious candidate

FCS annexure1

There are several examples of relaxation in residency period three or four times in entire service of scientists who are working as non technical and non scientific assignments and getting out standing calls.

  1. Scientist B Seniority Scenario, DRDO have no right to stop these scientist from 2003 to 2008 21 Scientists (oldest-15 Jan 1959 – 2 May 1986), if there is problem then the problem could not addressed by competent authority, it shows the failure of competent authority.
  1. sc B sen
  2. Scientist C Seniority Scenario DRDO have no right to stop these scientist from 1994 to 2008 109 Scientists (oldest-1 June1959 – 14 April 1983), if there is problem then the problem could not addressed by competent authority; it shows the failure of competent authoritysc C sen
  3. Scientist D Seniority Scenario DRDO have no right to stop these scientist from 1993 to 2008 50 Scientists (oldest-30 July 1956 – 22Jan 1979), if there is problem then the problem could not addressed by competent authority; it shows the failure of competent authoritysc D sen
  4. Scientist E Seniority Scenario DRDO have no right to stop these scientist from 1993 to 2008 95 Scientists (oldest-1 November 1954 – 5 November 1974), if there is problem then the problem could not addressed by competent authority; it shows the failure of competent authority.sc E sen
  5. Scientist F Seniority Scenario DRDO have no right to stop these scientist from 2001 to 2008 396 Scientists (oldest-16 May 1954 – 21 February 1971), if there is problem then the problem could not addressed by competent authority; it shows the failure of competent authoritysc F sen
  6. Scientist G Seniority Scenario DRDO have no right to stop these scientist from 2005 to 2008 58 Scientists (oldest-5 May 1954 – 6 January 1963), if there is problem then the problem could not addressed by competent authority; it shows the failure of competent authority.sc G sen

It is observed that in the DRDO organization scientists who were deprived from normal promotion are not aware of the proper FCS guidelines and also not know how to get justice or leave to the GOD.  Some scientists in DRDO tried their grievances through SA to RM or Defence Minister few got success but their success not known to other deprived scientists.

Can anyone believe that 729 deprived scientist are able to deliver their 100% output, this figure is approx 10% of total scientists of DRDO. 10 % unsatisfied work force is acceptable in any organization. Ab to jago Chander ji , apka contract to abhi pakka hai, teen saal to pure karne hain to kuch to DRDO ka bhala karte jao.

Recently one Scientist D from DRDE represented case to DG, DRDO that the APAR was tempered the given marks was  86 and  tampered with whitener and put 80 marks, it is common practice in DRDO, how can a young  scientist know about these heinous games by their superiors. Same things are also happening in DRTC also; when some official obtained APAR by RTI request this whitener game was exposed.

I request to these deprived scientists that they can ask their APARs by RTI request. APAR is very well in preview of RTI act, no exemption or schedule –II is applicable in this matter.

I am enclosing Honorable Nainital High court Judgment where anyone can ask assessment call, if his junior is called for assessment, please go through the judgment.

I am enclosing a representation of a scientist which was a successful example of fight for dignity.

In DRDO the scientists who were engaged in sundry works like stores procurement/ works/ security/ staff officer of establishment heads and able to lure boss by any means like putting AC’s in boss private house and support all domestic helps are the winner of outstanding APAR.

So overlook these kinds of officials and represent your case with scientific and technical contribution and serve our great country.

Nainital High Court Judgment WP No 263 dated 18th April 2003 Dr K K Jha Vs DRDO

Dr K K Jha Judgement

Representation of a scientist

To
SA to RM, DG (R&D), DRDO
DRDO BHAWAN,
NEW DELHI – 110011.

(THROUGH PROPER CHANNEL

Sub:     Assessment – 2013: Non Appearance of my name in the list of Scientists in the grade of Scientist ‘F’ from DRDL for consideration for promotion to the next higher grade. 

Ref:      RAC Letter No. RAC/08/35/ISC(Main)/2013, Dt 06th Mar 2013;  
             Fax Dt 11th April 2013 From Director, RAC to Director, DRDL

Sir,

Based on the recommendations of a Special Assessment Board, I was promoted from the grade of Scientist ‘E’ to the grade of Scientist ‘F’ in the Year 2008, though it should have been effective from 01st July 2007.

2.         This contention apart, I have completed 5 years of residency period (2008 – 2012) in the grade of Scientist ‘F’. I was anticipating appearance of my name in the List of Scientists in the grade of Scientist ‘F’ from DRDL for consideration for promotion to the next higher grade in the Fax dated 11th April 2013, sent by Director, RAC, Delhi to Director, DRDL. However I was disappointed.

3.         I would like to bring the following facts, related to my case, to your kind notice:

i)                    Non communication of ‘Below the Bench Mark’ (90%) grading in the Appraisal Year 2008. Since the said CPAR would have to be considered for assessing my suitability, the same is liable to be ignored in view of not communicating the ‘below bench mark’ CPAR.

ii)                  Further, the said CPAR (pertaining to the year 2008) grading carried out by I.O, R.O & Head of the Lab/Establishment by one Single Officer – all rolled into one, is not permissible as the very purpose of ensuring that the assessment of an officer is made dispassionately would be defeated. Thus, on this ground too, the said CPAR would have to be ignored as being illegal.

iii)                Eligible criteria for Assessment for promotion of Scientist ‘F’ to Sc ‘G’ in terms of CPAR/APAR minimum average marks for residency periods of 5 years and more do not have statutory force as the same is not contained in the SRO. When the field is governed by a statutory rule, the executive instructions have to be subservient to the former.

4.         Considering a minimum average mark of 85% as notional Bench Mark for consideration for promotion from Scientist ‘F’ to ‘G’ for a residency period of 5 years (Application of the criteria for consideration for promotion from Scientist ‘E’ to ‘F’), you are requested to ignore my CPAR pertaining to the Appraisal Year 2008 and include my name in the list of Scientists in the grade of Scientist ‘F’ in DRDL for consideration to the next higher grade and release the same at the earliest.  

Awaiting a favorable response,

Thanking you,

Dear friends any help required, for RTI, for representation, any legal guidance/assistance  need please write to – Prabhu Dandriyal – 21- Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun, 248008. Phone 0135-2787750, 09411114879, prabhudoon@gmail.com

 

 

 

 

Request for Information regarding EDK MoU from Honorable Ambassador Nancy J. Powell

To                                                                                            12th April 2014
Honorable Ambassador Nancy J. Powell,
U.S. Embassy,
Shantipath, Chanakyapuri,
New Delhi – 110021

Subject:  US based Firm Crowe & Company, South Carolina, USA signed MoU with DRDO,  Ministry of Defence,GOI

Honorable Madam,

On 2nd August 2013 a MoU signed in US Chamber of Commerce, 615 H St NW, Washington, DC 20062 by Ms Faye Crowe, CEO, Crowe and Company, 975 Bacons Bridge Road Summerville, SC 29485 USA with Shri Avinash Chander, Scietific Adviser to Raksha Mantri, Secretary, Department of Defence R&D and DG, DRDO in presence of then Indian Ambassador Ms Nirupama Rao.

In this occasion Dr John Holdren, Senior Adviser to the US President on S&T, Ron Somers, President USIBC and former US Defence Secretary William S Cohen among the guest.

Some News papers quote ““We are hoping that (technology transfer) would be a two way street,” former US Defence Secretary William S Cohen said, adding that this is a very significant step. He described it as a very “excellent example” of reverse technology transfer.

(http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/news/international/us-to-manufacture-market-drdos-explosive-detection-kit/article4985275.ece)

“We are planning to introduce the EDK to the US Army and US homeland security forces and in other international markets after getting necessary approvals from the US regulatory institutions,” said Fay Crowe, CEO and president of the company.

http://zeenews.india.com/news/nation/india-s-drdo-launches-explosive-detection-kit-in-us_866386.html

The launch of EDK in the US was significant in more ways than one, said the Indian ambassador Nirupama Rao, who described the transfer of technology as “an important milestone in the process of evolution of India-US strategic partnership.”

http://gulfnews.com/news/world/india/india-launches-explosive-detection-kit-in-us-1.1216355

Chander was upbeat over first of DRDO developed products getting globalised with the transfer of Indian technology to the US which not long ago looked at the DRDO “as a very reluctant supplier”.

http://www.theweekendleader.com/Headlines/1407/india’s-drdo-launches-explosive-detection-kit-in-us.html

Fay Crowe, owner of the company now manufacturing the selling these kits in the US, said she believed the kit could have prevented the Boston Marathon explosions.

The kit was launched in Washington on Friday for production and sale in the US and other countries in the region, by Crowe and Company, a South Carolina firm.

It is currently undergoing tests by US military and other security agencies but may soon be headed for use by coalition forces in Afghanistan through a non-profit.

http://idrw.org/?p=25199

SOURCE: HINDUSTAN TIMES

“This kit has a much better field deployable position than other items. We have just signed an agreement with a US company to take the technology to South America. The technology would be presented to the Columbian Defense Ministry and to Panama and across the world,” Crowe said.

It is India which holds the patent on the technology, and Crowe has paid an unspecified amount to commercialise it in the US and would also pay royalty on the EDK kits sold.

“Yes”, she said when asked if Boston bombings could have been prevented if the technology was available in the US at that time.

“I believe that it could have been deployed in Boston and with proper training if the kits were in use…at large events, it would every easy to implement a posture where you can detect explosives,” she said.

THE ECONOMIC TIMES

As per available records of Ms Faye Crowe, CEO, Crowe and Company 975 Bacons Bridge Road Summerville, SC 29485 USA in Internet is following

Crowe And Company, LLC

975 Bacons Bridge Road

Summerville, SC 29485  

Phone: (843) 991-6759

Company Contacts – Fay Crowe

Business Information

Website: crowderscustomizing.com

Location Type            – Single Location

State of Incorporation          South Carolina

Year Established        2007

Annual Revenue Estimate    100000

Employees      2

SIC Code         8742, Management Consulting Services

NAICS Code    541613, Marketing Consulting Services

Business Categories  

Distribution Channels Consultants in Summerville, SC

Distribution channels consultant

Management Consulting Services

As a vigilant citizen of India I request you to please help me to know the about the truth of above mention statements made by Ms Fay Crowe CEO, Crowe and Company 975 Bacons Bridge Road Summerville, SC 29485 USA.

  1. Whether she and her company is competent for such tie with Indian Defence Premier Organization DRDO, Ministry of Defence, GOI.
  2. Whether she applied for necessary approvals from the US regulatory institutions as claimed by Ms Faye Crowe, CEO, Crowe and Company.
  3. Whether she introduces the EDK to the US Army and US homeland security forces as claimed by Ms Faye Crowe, CEO, Crowe and Company.
  4. As per news paper Ms Faye Crowe, CEO, Crowe and Company has paid an unspecified amount to commercialise it in the US and would also pay royalty on the EDK kits sold. Any approval for financial deal with DRDO.
  5. As per news paper “It is currently undergoing tests by US military and other security agencies but may soon be headed for use by coalition forces in Afghanistan through a non-profit.  In this regard information may kindly be provided.

Hope you will take it seriously for the sake of dignity of both countries.

With warm regards

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

Implementation of Flexible Complimenting Scheme (FCS) Rules with letter and spirit

To                                                                                                         12th April 2014
Sh A K Antony
Defence Minister
Room -104, South Block
New Delhi – 110011

Subject:  Implementation of Flexible Complimenting Scheme (FCS) Rules with letter and spirit  

Honorable Sir,

DRDO has misused, manipulated and override the Flexible Complimenting Scheme (FCS) guide lines issued by DoPT, GOI.

Guidelines – DOPT after 5th,CPC issued comprehensive instructions on FCS in OM No.2/41/97-PIC dated 9.11.98. These have been further reviewed in the light of 6th CPC instructions and modified FCS guidelines issued in OM NO. AB 14017/37/2008-Estt.(RR) dated l0th September, 2010

OM No. AB-14017/36/2011-Estt(RR) dated 21st September 2012 – “FCS should be rigorous with due emphasis on evaluation of scientific and technical knowledge so that only scientists who have to their credit demonstrable achievements or higher level of technical merit are recommended for promotion.”

DRDO Hqrs, however, manipulated the forgoing rules and cleared/ recommended as outstanding to several scientists who are totally engaged in administrative/managerial /sundry tasks/ jobs/ assignments and due to proximity of top officials.

The ultimate looser is the real scientist who are giving their 100% time and efforts, the organization and the poor tax payers of India. This has further encouraged the growing incompetency and real talent leave the organization.

The Key post holder Dr A K Singh, DOP,DRDO is the leading example of violation of  Flexible Complimenting Scheme (FCS) guide lines.  He joined as scientist ‘B’ in 1988 and did science upto 2004 got two promotion in average time.  Since 2004 he is out of scientific work and due to proximity with CC R&D HR as staff officer ( 2004- 2006) managed out of turn promotion superseded lot of devotional scientists. He also managed the post of Director CEPTAM (Non technical assignment) 2007-2010. Then got post Director HRD(2010 – 2013) again  (Non technical assignment) and managed out of turn promotion superseded hundreds  of devotional scientists who deserves as per FCS and has credit demonstrable achievements or higher level of technical merit. But DRDO top bosses are great and override the Flexible Complimenting Scheme (FCS) guide lines issued by DoPT, GOI and blessed and honored Dr A K Singh with Scientist ‘G’ post. He is now working as DOP,DRDO  again  (Full time non technical assignment) and sure about to get scientist ‘H’ promotion  with hope to supersede 283 scientists as his current seniority roll no is 284.

Similarly one more example of violation of  Flexible Complimenting Scheme (FCS) guide lines in mid level Sh Ashok Sharma, Scientist ‘D’ of INMAS, DRDO working as works officer (full time non technical assignment) got outstanding call for promotion of scientist ‘E’ in only three years and ready to superseded 962 scientists as his seniority number is 963.

This is the tip of ice berg and such anti national activity encourage in DRDO has enhance the growing incompetence and has derailed the real goal of DRDO to support and strengthen the defence preparedness of India.

I request you to kindly give appropriate directives to DG DRDO for Implementation of Flexible Complimenting Scheme (FCS) Rules with letter and spirit.  

Thanking you

With warm regards

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

Alarming Situation in DRDO For HR Management

To                                                                                                         31st March 2014
Sh A K Antony,
Defence Minister,
Room -104, South Block
New Delhi – 110011

Subject:  Alarming Situation in DRDO For HR Management

DRDO has established more than 52 Labs/Establishments across the country with an aim and object to provide reliable & sustainable warfare technologies to the defence forces.

In its pursuit to evade the frontline technology, DRDO encourages its employees and officials to pursue higher qualification and provides all possible incentives as per GOI rules and guidelines.

DRDO Hqrs/ top brasses however, misuses the GOI facilities and encourages the diploma/ degrees from unrecognized universities/institutes for their pet employees (Chamchas), largely the cases are from the universities which are recognized by the UGC/AICTE but the courses offered by these in the mode of distance education, where the study centers / franchises are not properly authorized by UGC/AICTE or Apex body. Most of the cases in DRDO, these Diploma /Degrees are managed fraudulently because it is observed that employee who claimed the diploma / degree not having proper marks sheets, not having proof of proper fee receipts, not having leave records as per exam date sheets, not having admit cards of centers/ and n numbers of ways to verify the degree/ diploma etc.

Surprisingly, you will be shocked to know that these diploma / degree holders have become senior scientists and in DRDO, almost 10 to 15% in total staff / Technical officers / scientists possess such diploma/ degrees etc.

The growing incompetency and failure of projects causes shift towards system engineering. Since 15 years the basic science or fundamental research work has vanished from DRDO objectives, because of improperly qualified workforce.

The person inducted as laborer/peon/security assistant or technician, subsequently via limited departmental competitive examination (LDCE) channel and with the fake/unrecognized diploma / degree become scientist. It is all because of DRDO having their own recruitment and assessment system that is RAC & CEPTAM.

Sir, you already noticed few top scientists of DRDO misused the autonomy given to DRDOyou’re your good office recommended to reexamine the recruitment procedure of scientist in DRDO and asked for CBI intervention vide Ref- Note at 45-55 ante and observations of JS & CVO at note 56 ante.

RTI reveals that DRDO having such employees/ officers who don’t have proper recognized diploma / degree but no action was taken on this issue by DRDO Hqrs till date. (Copy enclosed for ready reference.)

In RTI reply No.01/2091/P2014/0054 dated 12 March 2014 DRDO Hqrs informed that “it is stated that the cases for grant of Lump Sum Incentive are received from respective Labs/Estt in which it is certified that the higher qualifications and the institute are approved by the competent authority. On receipt of such confirmation, the cases are submitted to Ministry of Defence who process each and every cases and issue sanction for grant of Lump Sum Incentives after getting concurrence of the Integrated Finance. However, in case of any doubt regarding verification/ reorganization, the same is thoroughly examined before issuing the sanction. It is also stated here that the lump sum incentive is only one time to promote higher qualification among employees.” (Copy Enclosed for ready reference)

Sir, the astonishing fact of DRDO working is revealed by Director of Personal vide letter No DOP/01/03500/Lump sum/M01 dated March 2014 to all Director Lab/Estt/ Dte in Hq dated 11 March 2014 in Para – 1, line- 9 states that Of late it has been notice that in most of the cases are taken up acquiring higher qualification, recognition of various courses and universities/ institutes by Competent Authority is not verified/ authenticated by Labs prior to sanction of permission. This non verification in the some cases results in award of degrees/ diplomas by Universities / Institutes not recognized by the competent recognizing authorities. Grant of incentives for such higher qualification becomes against the Rules”   (Copy enclosed for your ready reference.)

It is requested that suitable committee should be form under supervision of CVO, MoD to scrutinize the DRDO scientist, officials and staff’s education qualification records thoroughly, so the incompetent and illegally inducted persons can weed out.

DRDO already spends crores of rupees for digitizing HR records so it is not big task to scrutinize the DRDO’s 7000+ scientists, 25000 + officials and staff’s education qualification.

Regards

Prabhu  Dandriyal,
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun -248008
phone 0135 -2787750 Mobile 0911114879
e-mail id – prabhudoon@gmail.com website -www.corruptionindrdo.com
 
To
Dr. Syamal Kumar Sarkar
Secretary (Personnel)
Department of Personnel and Training
North Block, New Delhi -110001
 
To
Sh Avinash Chander,
DG DRDO, SA to RM,
DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg,
NEW DELHI -110105
 
To
Smt. Smita Nagaraj,
Joint Secretary (PlC) & CVO ,
Ministry of Defence, 109-B, South Block, 
New Delhi- 10011
 
 fake degree dop letter
fake degree dop letter page2
RTI reply drdo hq fake degree12 march
FA Reply1
FA Reply1

fareplypage2

List from DEAL, DRDO, Dehradun
List from DEAL, DRDO, Dehradun

 

A Relative Comparison of Science and Technology Development in India with Neighbors like China and Pakistan

Dr K K Jha

Applied Science and Humanities, DCE, Gurgaon

 Introduction:

The advances of science and technology have a profound impact on our lives in almost every sphere of activity, such as health, agriculture, communication, transportation, and defence. These advances have been driven by an ever-growing exciting discoveries, patented and parented by  science laboratories in the West, and by their transformation into technology and new products that have flooded world markets. . The world is today sharply divided by a technology boundary that separates the technologically advanced countries from the technologically backward ones. India shares almost 1500 Km geographical boundaries each with China and Pakistan. The three neighbors  show almost the same (poor) indicators of social development but they are struggling to achieve sustainable economic growth, self-reliance in technology development and in gaining an important global position. India, Pakistan and China have totally different political systems which play a vital role in their growth and development and in shaping their science and technology policies.

Science in India is on the move in a big way. The government has initiated multibillion dollar investments to kick start research, education, and innovation over the next five years. In early 2013, government announced an ambitious science, technology, and innovation funding protocol: in the next five years, double its investment in science and technology and, by 2020, drive India’s output of scientific publications to be among the top five nations globally. According to Prof. C. N. Rao chairman of the Science Advisory Council to the Prime Minister “The government is going to inject $5 billion into science and technology over the next five years,”. “This doubles the investment to-date from 1% to 2% of GDP.”  This increase in funding is aimed at creating jobs, educating technical leaders, and improving the quality of science in this country of 1.2 billion people.

India seeks to improve its global scientific reputation. The creation of new institutions and universities (funded by Govt. and private), opportunities for independent leadership training, and efforts to expand fundamental research base and cultivate a culture of technology transfer are just a few components to encourage young researchers to set up their own industry. In addition, international alliances, collaborations between India and other developed nations has helped  building strong scientific capacity within the subcontinent.

But despite these outreach and funding programs, there are still some challenges that need to be addressed for making India super power in 2020.

Quality of Science / Technology Education:

Recent infrastructure investment programmes have successfully produced new facilities and institutions all over India. However, there is insufficient talent within India to take up this task. Nonetheless, theoretical and experimental / analytical research in India is moving forward with areas such as nanotechnology, clean energy, and of course health at the forefront. Our space,and defence  (R&D)  programme  is  slowly moving towards self reliance.

Expanding Facilities and Infrastructure:

The Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) are among India’s most prestigious academic institutions. These autonomous institutes were established in the early 1960s, and the government has since expanded their number from the original five—Kharagpur, Bombay (Mumbai), Madras (Chennai), Kanpur, and Delhi—to a total of 16. This increase reflects the government’s new policies to give students from a wider range of social backgrounds the opportunity to study at India’s top-tier universities. However, the products of IIT preferred to join lucrative jobs  elsewhere and the potential trained  manpower failed to do justice with the country.

In recent years the nation has launched five new Indian institutes of science education and research, eight new IITs, 16 new central universities, 10 new national institutes of technology, six new research and development institutions in biotechnology, and five institutions in other branches including bio- materials and solar energy.

Tata Institute of Fundamental Research (TIFR) in Mumbai, one of India’s oldest and premier basic research institutes has opened its new campus. The new 200-acre campus will be significantly larger than the Mumbai facility. A new International Centre for Theoretical Sciences in Bangalore—similar to, but broader in scope than the Isaac Newton Institute for Mathematical Sciences in Cambridge, which organizes international research programs in pure and applied mathematics has been established.  Although, “finding high-quality staff to teach and manage the new centers will be a challenge.” Since  1980  we encouraged  technical managers  and sales managers  than  high  quality researchers.  In fact a vacuum  has been  created and it is difficult to find committed skilled researchers.

In an effort to fill the abundance of new positions, the government has established programs to court Indians working abroad back to their home country.  Ministry of Science and Technology (MST) has taken steps  to attract highly skilled researchers working overseas.

Increasing Career Opportunities

With the increases in funding and rapidly expanding institutions, opportunities are becoming more readily available for scientists who want to work in India.

One challenge that is on the  minds of both Indian academics and government representatives is the ability to draw and retain talented post docs and other early-career scholars into India’s institutions. Some researchers are less than optimistic about finding a solution to attract post docs to India when higher remuneration packages are available in the West. Although this situation is not uncommon in India, certain national, international, “and institutional programs may be helping to alleviate this problem.

The Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR)-Nehru Science Postdoctoral Research Fellowship is one such program designed to engage younger scientists. This postdoc opportunity seeks to identify promising young researchers with innovative ideas and provide them with training to transition into independent research careers.

Growing Talent Early

The new funding may prove fruitful for innovation, but there is a need for greater access to education for Indians—approximately half of whom are under 25 years old. The government has responded to calls for greater educational opportunities for young people from a wider spectrum of society, and recently the DST launched the Innovation in Science Pursuit for Inspired Research (INSPIRE) program, with the aim of attracting students to science and expects to have funded one million young scholars by 2014.

This is just one program that seeks to build research capacity by giving students the opportunity to gain vital research-related skills. This is important in order to sustain global competitiveness among progressive nations like China. According to C. N. Rao, China, currently produces almost as many journal articles as the United States, and  will soon overtake the U.S.  China graduates some 20,000 Ph.D.s annually., “How can we compete with this?”

Policymakers want India to increase the number of top scientific publications. To achieve this we need more high-quality submissions, and to achieve that we need more good people. Unfortunately  most of the  scientific leaders  have never soiled their hands.

One of the challenges to finding “good people” is that many Indian students prefer to major in engineering rather than science, because of the promise and prestige of lucrative industrial career opportunities. But India’s leaders recognized the need to motivate more youngsters to pursue science careers and hone research skills by forming five Indian Institutes of Science Education and Research (IISERs) in 2007. Here, faculty members have the freedom to pursue interdisciplinary projects while engaging their undergraduates in research.

The Khorana Program is an international consortium also designed to enhance research capacity within India and across borders. Jointly supported by UW, DBT, and the Indo-U.S. Science and Technology Forum (IUSSTF), and launched in 2008, the program grants Indian and American students the opportunity to pursue research at universities in each other’s nations.

Developing Research Areas

The new funding policy will advance India’s prowess in a number of strategic industries, such as space, energy, and the life sciences as well as important research areas in physics, materials science, and atmospheric science. Planned missions to Mars and a neutrino observatory will receive financial support under the new framework.

But it is also the new policy’s acknowledgement of the role of innovation in targeted technological industries that is contributing to a renewed excitement among India’s scientists. Energy is one of those strategic sectors, and many of India’s scientific leaders are leveraging the government’s interest in it to enhance vital research programs. For example, as materials science plays a central role in developing innovative technologies for the growing energy market, scientists like Arindam Ghosh at IISc are advancing materials research in graphene for solar cells and nanoelectronics.

India’s scientists are also working with their counterparts in the United States on a major new Indo-U.S. initiative called the Solar Energy Research Institute for India and the United States (SERIIUS), funded through the U.S.-India Partnership to Advance Clean Energy and administered by IUSSTF. India needs every drop of power we can produce.

Affordable health care and medical devices not requiring external electrical sources of power for operation are high-priority projects being undertaken at the CeNSE at IISc. “India has the largest number of people with diabetes in the world, We want to use nanoelectronics to produce cheap wireless biosensors to monitor this disease in people living in rural India.”

The Institute of Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine (in Stem), and Centre for Cellular and Molecular Platforms (C-CAMP) on the NCBS campus are at the forefront of life sciences and translational medical research. “We offer an excellent environment for engaging in fundamental interdisciplinary research and also for early translation. We want to encourage our researchers to move ideas from discovery to innovation. To do so, NCSB has partnered with industry leaders to accelerate commercialization. Recent examples of successful projects include an inexpensive kit to test for HIV/AIDS; the licensing of this technology is being negotiated with global companies.

This emphasis on translational research and technology transfer is being amplified throughout the country. The Tata Innovation Fellowship, a highly competitive scheme instituted by the DBT, recognizes and rewards innovative and productive life science researchers. Its specific prominence is on interdisciplinary, translational research with a potential for technology commercialization.

Future Challenges

Both challenges and hope lie ahead for India. Other often neglected but important science-related issues to address include establishing university curricula to improve the ability of young students to communicate in English, especially technical writing; the introduction of coordinated proactive strategies by research institutes to improve the ‘visibility’ of their scientists; incentives and financial support for entrepreneurial scientists to set up companies to commercialize ideas; and changes in labor laws to enable universities to hire qualified scientists irrespective of nationality.

The general mood of scientists—both veterans and young returnees—in India is positive. “India needs to build many more ‘innovation ecosystems’ like NCBS where there is a lot of intellectual freedom and a drive to define the cutting edge at an international level.”

And as Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh recently said in an interview with Science, “One has to be optimistic. (….), unless one is optimistic, one is overwhelmed by the dimension of the development task that we have to accomplish.”

“Science is more essential for our prosperity, our security, our health, our environment, and our quality of life than it has ever been before.” – President Barack Obama, April 27, 2009

India’s Science, Technology, Innovation Policy of 2013

A strong and visible Science, Research and Innovation System for High Technology led path for India” – “SRISHTI” – is the main goal of India’s new Science, Technology and Innovation policy (2013). At the 2010 Indian Science Congress, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh declared 2010-20 as the “Decade of Innovations” and formed the National Innovation Council. The STI Policy 2013 is in furtherance of the declaration and aims to bring fresh perspectives to bear on innovation in the changing context.

The statement “India’s global competitiveness will be determined by the extent to which the STI enterprise contributes social good and/or economic wealth” reflects India’s concerns about achieving higher economic growth for all sector development. Energy and environment, food and nutrition, water and sanitation, habitat, affordable health care and skill building and unemployment are the major identified areas that need new structural mechanisms and models, while the promotion of scientific temper, enhancing skill for application of science among the youth, making careers in science, making research and innovation attractive are some of the other major elements identified for connecting science with the people and increasing the number of skilled manpower in the Science & Technology (S&T) sector. In the new STI policy equal weightage is given to establishing world class R&D infrastructure, positioning India among the top five countries of the world and increasing private sector participation in R&D. India is looking to increase its Gross Expenditure on Research and Development (GERD) to two per cent of the GDP in the coming years.

Promoting the establishment of large R&D facilities in public-private partnership (PPP) mode, permitting the participation of multiple stakeholders in the R&D system, treating R&D in the private sector at par with public establishments are some of the other proposed points that are mentioned in the new policy to get more private investments in India’s S&T programs.’ STI policy 2013, gives hope to achieve high in developing indigenous technology by increasing private sector involvement in its S&T programmes.

Pakistan: Science, Technology and Innovation Policy 2012

To achieve the security, prosperity and social cohesion of Pakistan through equitable and sustainable socio-economic progress using science, technology and innovation as central pillars of development in all sectors of economic activity” is the main vision of Pakistan’s Science, Technology and Innovation policy (2012). STI 2012 highlights four major areas – Socio-economic development, Human resource development, R&D infrastructure and S&T management – in which Pakistan wants to see more progress. Pakistan is looking forward to increase its R&D expenditure; which will be one per cent of GDP by 2015 and two per cent by 2020. The prominent features of the current policy are the proposal for an effective mechanism of policy oversight, highlighting innovation as a driver of economic activity, paradigm shift from supply to demand side and an effort to align ST&I policy with national policies in other economic sectors.’ 16 Thrust Areas are also identified for R&D activities. In this new policy, focus is more on promoting R&D activities, programmes for technology transfer and technology development.

Science and Technology Programmes of China

China’s science and technology is undergoing a great development. In all, the increasing development of China’s overall S&T capacity narrows its gap with the world level in science. China keeps pace with developed countries in some key research areas, while it has already reached the world level or even ranked top in some emerging research areas. China’s output in science and technology increased fast; its innovation capacity has greatly strengthened, the role of science and technology in socio-economic development has greatly enhanced, and the public awareness of innovation and science greatly improved.

China has developed its long term S&T programs in the form of “Science and Technology in China: A Roadmap to 2050”, which was published in a Strategic General report of the Chinese Academy of Sciences in 2010. China has identified eight basic and strategic systems for socio-economic development and twenty–two S&T initiatives of strategic importance to China’s modernization.

In January 2006, China initiated a 15-year “Medium to Long term Plan (MLP) for the development of science and Technology”. The MLP calls for China to become an “innovation-oriented society” by the year 2020 and a World leader in science and technology by 2050. China’s science and technology programmes are more oriented towards developing “indigenous technology” and new “innovations”. In coming years China is planning to reduce imported technology and promote R&D infrastructure and activities. Since long China is investing a great deal in science education, specifically higher education in science and technology, to develop world class scientists and make China self-reliant in technology development.

Since 1980, China is following very well developed science and technology programmes, plans and policies both for developmental and security requirements. China is running five major national programmes under the banner of National Programs for Science and Technology, which includes: The National Program for Key Science and Technology Programs (Key Technologies Research and Development Program – renamed in 2006 “zhicheng” or support), National High Technology Research and Development Program – (863 Programs), National Key Basic Research Program (973 Programs), The Torch Program, The Spark Program.

An Overview of Economic Growth of India, Pakistan and China in recent years

“The re-emergence of China and India as major forces in the world economy is one of the most important developments in the early 21st century.” “The growth rate of their gross domestic products from 2020 to 2025 is expected to be about the same—5.7 percent in China and 5.6 percent in India. China’s current overall GDP is about three times larger than India’s, and by 2025 the difference between their two GDPs is estimated to be $4.4 trillion annually.” The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of Pakistan grew by 3.67 per cent in 2012. These different growth patterns of economic development also tell different growth stories of science and technology development in these three countries.

Brief Analysis of Science and Technology Achievements of India, Pakistan and China

In recent times, the IT Industry, Space and missile programmes and Research in basic science have emerged as major areas in which India is showing good progress at the domestic and international levels. But in spite of having a good number of science and technology institutes and organizations, policies and programmes, a good number of human resources and recent economic progress, India’s science and technology programmes are suffering due to a number of reasons, of which lack of coordination between organizations and improper implementation of policies are the two main reasons affecting India’s science and technology programmes.

Pakistan has developed a good number of science and technology institutes and universities for higher education and research. But its scientific programmes have always been influenced by other countries’ political and economic agendas. Between the 1950s and 1970s Pakistan received scientific and technical support from the USA while China emerged as a trusted ally in the 1960s. China has provided blueprints for its nuclear programme and the material required for developing nuclear weapons. “Pakistan has achieved a lot in nuclear science and acquired complete nuclear capability in 1983.” Post 9/11, Pakistan is getting more international funds including from the USA for different development programmes.

The Chinese government’s national science programmes and industrial policies aimed at high tech industries are a significant contributor to the technological successes enjoyed by Chinese firms. Among the factors propelling China‘s emergence as a techno-industrial power is its low-cost manufacturing capabilities, a huge market, an export promotion strategy, and the shrewd appropriation of the best technology from the international system.’ China’s science and technology programs are highly motivated towards economic Development and national Security. It is constantly increasing its strength in fulfilling security requirements and achieving sustainable high economic growth.

Conclusions:

India, Pakistan and China are three different countries with varying socio-cultural, economic and historical backgrounds. S&T innovations and economic growth are two sides of the same coin and deeply interconnected with each other. Today we are living in a globally connected world. These connections and collaborations are purely for business and economic purposes, but in coming years we will see global cooperation in the field of science, technology and innovations as well. But we should not forget that such collaboration and cooperation are premised on political, strategic and economic interests. These new developments in the science and technology policies of India, Pakistan and China will change global perspectives in many ways the in coming years. In such a scenario it will be interesting to see how science and technology innovations and all such collaborations will shape relations between India, Pakistan and China.

References:

News paper articles (The Hindu, The Times of India, The Indian Express, The Hindustan)

Dr K. K. Jha
Ph D.
Scientist (Retd)
DRDO, Ministry Of Defence, GOI
Mob no.:- 08954436364