

SUBJECT: COMPLAINT AGAINST CORRUPTION IN PROCUREMENT BY DR. VIJAY VEER, DIRECTOR, DRL, TEZPUR
Sir,
10. He has split the indents intentionally with gross violation of PM 2006(Purchase Manual of DRDO).
11. He is giving the contracts for the work which CCE (R&D) East is supposed to do, making his way to accumulate ill-gotten gains.
12. From the facts stated above, it is amply crystal clear that prima facie material regarding misuse of power for personal gain and corruption exists by Dr. Vijay Veer, Director, DRL, Tezpur.
13. The corrupt practices and misuse of power by Dr. Vijay Veer, Director, DRL, Tezpur has developed corrupt system at DRL, Tezpur and that affected scientific activity and R&D at DRL, Tezpur.
14. In view of the above mentioned facts and evidences it is earnestly requested that an order for through investigation of all procurement done by Dr. Vijay Veer, Director, DRL, Tezpur after assuming charge as Director, DRL, Tezpur to stop further corruption and wastage of poor tax payers money.
Regards Prabhu Dandriyal,
Enclosed: PCDA, Letters, Demands, Supply Orders twenty pages


Subject: Patriots are vulnerable and easy prey for corrupt officials of DRDO
Honorable Sir,
Please find enclosed a representation of Sh G Jupiter of ASL, DRDO, Hyderabad to Sh Ranjit Sinha, IPS, Director, CBI for seeking justice.
Sh G Jupiter helped Intelligence Bureau (IB) to nab the espionage activity of DRDO.
The officer had a meeting with Ms Rosy Sharma then Deputy Secretary, D (R&D) Ministry of Defence on 20th and 21st June 2001.
Sh G Jupiter helped the Government of India to exposed and fixed mafia and spy agent operating in DRDO.
Intelligence Bureau (IB) officer Sh K T Moses has awarded Indian Police Medal for exposing this case, however, Sh G Jupiter was victimized by DRDO for the same act to the extent that he had to approached Honorable Court (CAT) for justice but mighty DRDO did not honor the Honorable Court (CAT) judgment till date and happy to harass a genuine honest patriot.
To maintain the honesty and commitment to the nation, it is requested that this case may please be treated with open heart and the officer should be given justice and his dues the nation woes.
Regards Prabhu Dandriyal,Enclosed –



Tripoli varsity
EXPRESS NEWS SERVICE
HYDERABAD, May 4: Defence Research Development Organisation (DRDO) scientist Srinivasulu, who was nabbed by Intelligence Bureau (IB) officials and city police here on Thursday night, was found to be working as a faculty member in the Tripoli University in Libya.
IB officials, acting on a tip off, sought the assistance of city police, who arrested the B-grade defence scientist at the Rajiv Gandhi International airport when he was about to board the Dubai-bound Air-India flight.
According to sources, Srinivasulu neither submitted his resignation nor obtained permission from the DRDO authorities for working in Libya. He obtained a passport without the knowledge of DRDO which is statutory. He left for Libya an year-and-half back and joined as a faculty member in the university at Tripoli.
During interrogation, Srinivasulu reportedly confessed before IB officials that he was taking some secret documents with him and one of his colleagues at Tripoli university, Kumar, was also involved in the spying.
Sources added that Srinivasulu has planned to go to Sharjah by the Dubai-bound Indian Airlines flight and then to Malta Islands in Africa by air. From there he was to catch a ship for Tripoli.
Copyright © 1997 Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd.
Subject: Request to investigate the complaint against Dr A K Tyagi, CPIO, DRDO Hqrs Scientist’F’,DRDO, Ministry of Defence.
Reference: Vide CVC letter No 011/DEF/018-121962 date 17/03/2011 complaint forwarded to CVO, Ministry of Defence, South Block.
Sir,
A complaint sent to CVC against Dr A K Tyagi, CPIO, DRDO Hqrs Scientist’F’, DRDO, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi on 10th Nov 2010, Copy enclosed for your ready reference.
The CVC registered the case vide complain no 569/11/9 and further sent to CVO, Ministry of Defence, South Block vide CVC letter No 011/DEF/018-121962 date 15/03/2011(Copy enclosed)
Further in between I have sent an RTI request to DIAT, DRDO, Pune to get more input on the subject matter. (Copy enclosed)
I have received information that was enough to prove the irregularities in procurement and payment to vendors. (Copy enclosed)
Further Mr. Rajiv Chauhan, Advocate filed one more RTI and requested the details, after CIC intervention DIAT, DRDO provide the some documents for inspection related to procurement of online magazine costing around 22 lakhs plus. Copy of RTI and related information which we received from DIAT DRDO are enclosed herewith as evidences.
DRDO’s procurement practices are the most illogical and in the name secrecy DRDO is fooling the whole nation and in this act CDA is also equally responsible, in some cases knowingly, or in some cases unknowingly, because in the name of technology DRDO scientists are easily able to fool them.
This is a very small case of few lakhs or nearly 1.5 crores but it will show you the mechanism of how DRDO scientists are making money and fooling the system.
The ink signed order copy is not available in the department and the payment of more than 22 lakhs was done.
Like online ‘Nature Magazine” subscription available online, all the procurement papers i.e. order copy and other related papers in files are scanned papers.
Main questions in Dr. A K Tyagi case
1. Where is the ink-signed order copy of Online Nature Magazine?
2. Without ink signed order copy of Online Nature Magazine, how JCDA, Pune released the payments?
3. Are any records in DIAT, Library available which can show how many persons logged with Online Nature Magazine?
4. The observations of DIAT, DRDO enquiry committee against Dr. A K Tyagi still unanswered?
i. To understand the existing procedure for procurement of Books by Library, it was necessary to go through basis of existing procedure, record and files to related to procurement. In absence of OI/C,IC&L very limited records made available by Library and after arrival of OI/C,IC&L access to information and records was totally denied to the Board of Officers.
ii. Existing Procedure and Anomalies- the following is observed by Board of Officers.
i) OI/C,IC&L places demand directly to vendors after approval by Library Committee. There is no procedure of quotation/negotiation followed. it is noted that as per terms and conditions no discounts have been asked.
ii) Order has been placed on single tender basis
iii. During limited observations it was seen that Books were accepted at higher prices than the order/approval price by the purchase committee.
iv. No proof of price is being put up to the purchase Committee for approval.
v. Firm Orders are being placed by OI/C,IC&L without bidding/negotiation
vi. Vendors to whom orders are being placed are not registered. As per purchase procedure orders of only up to Rs 5000/- can be placed to unregistered vendors. This rule is not followed.
vii. In our limited inquiry, we observed that large numbers of books were
viii. Accepted at much higher price. We site few example-
a) Book ordered for Rs 6029.07 was procured for price Rs 81,936.00
b) Book ordered for Rs 13,156.00 was procured for price Rs 27,362.68
c) Book ordered for Rs 40,000.00 was procured for price Rs 3,60,00.00
d) Book ordered for Rs 3,292.24 was procured for price Rs 5,233.09
ix. We did not find any justification in orders or Terms & Conditions to accept such high billing prices for payment to vendors.
x. OI/C,IC&L did not conduct independent investigation regarding over valued books supplied by the vendors for their correct price.
xi. We found such number of cases where over payment was cleaned by OI/C, IC&L and Finance Officer without amendment or without bringing to notice of approving authority or VC
xii. We did not find any power vested to OI/C,IC&L, Finance Officer to clear the over payment cases.
xiii. Before payment to vendors, pre-auditing is mandatory (as per purchase procedure) No such pre auditing mechanism is found resulting in escaping the over payment cases from scrutiny and corrective action. We did not find any document or authority to exempt from pre –auditing.
xiv. Functioning of Library in case Library procurement was found devoid of adequate check and balance and control mechanism. We can conclude that OI/C,IC&L and Finance Officer flouted the principle of FR-21
5. Who is saving the culprit?
As we are aware that now some cases of DRDO were taken up seriously with efforts, like Dr. Arun Kumar, Dr. S M Veerabhadrappa, etc.
We hope that you will take this matter seriously and personally because it was pending since 15/03/2011 in CVO, Ministry of Defence.
Regards
Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal 21-Sunderwala, Raipur Dehradun-248008 Uttarakhand Cell No- 9411114879, Landline- 0135-2787750e-mail- prabhudoon@gmail.com , website : www.corruptionindrdo.com
Copy Enclosed-
Copy of complaint sent to CVC against Dr A K Tyagi
Date -10th Nov 2010 To The Chief Vigilance Commissioner Satarkata Bhavan A-Block GPO Complex INA New delhi : 110023Complaint is being lodged against
Name – Dr.A K Tyagi, Tele 23007453
Designation- DRDO – Scientist ‘F’, CPIO, Head, RTI Cell, 314 A, DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg, New Delhi – 110105
Dr. A.K.Tyagi, Scientist ‘F’, Head, RTI Cell, DRDO previously posted in Defence Institute of Advanced Technology, (DIAT), Deemed University. Defence Institute of Advanced (Deemed University) is a premier academic institute functioning under the aegis of Defence Research & Development Organization
Dr. A.K.Tyagi worked in DIAT as O I/C(Officer In-Charge), IC&L(Information Center & Library) and Finance Officer during his posting.
He has violated the all procurement norms laid by DRDO authority vide there Revised Edition 1999, DRDO manual of Procedure for Management of Library & Technical Information Centers. – DRDO Hqrs, Ministry of Defence.
Page No – 25 Para 4.2.3 No 4 Terms for procurement of books
Page No – 33 Para 4.3.4 Terms for procurement of periodical publication
Above procedure were violated by Dr A.K Tyagi in his all procurements and misappropriate the government funds and misinterpreted the government rules for minting money for himself and as well as for his god fathers.
The book purchase in DRDO the approval of library committee is obtain which selects the useful book/journals and then the normal purchasing procedure is followed the quotations are called and the lowest bidder gets the order.
There are few publisher are whose books/journals have standard price and when order is placed it goes directly to publisher.
In Dr A K Tyagi cases most of orders were placed to local vendors in single tender basis. When the purchases of books by violating the all the rules Dr A K Tyagi surpassed the all the records and the budget limit was crossed five times( 30 Laks to 1.5 Corers). This action was noticed by all the DIAT officials and an inquiry committee was framed. The committee constituted by then Vice Chancellor a senior officer as chairman and two officer as board member,. When the committee starts the investigation most of the documents were denied by Dr A K Tyagi, somehow, the inquiry committee submitted its report. The amount of corruption was good enough to punish the official but as usual God father culture prevailing in DRDO helped him and gave him safe passage by transferring to DRDO Hqrs.
The God Father guide him to commit the corrupt practice and got protected by none other than Dr W Selvamurthy, CC R&D,DRDO.
With his blessing he purchased Nature journal, nature publishing group, 4 Crinan Street, London, United Kingdom via local vendor for Rs 25 Lakhs
Facts : Till date nobody from DIAT has seen the Nature Journal
This journal was not useful for DIAT as the same deals with life sciences and DIAT area is ARMAMENT ENGINEERING, APPLIED MATHEMATICS, METALLURGY, COMPUTER ENGINEERING, APPLIED PHYSICS, AEROSPACE ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL ENGINEERING, EXPLOSIVES & APPLIED CHEMISTRY, ELECTRONICS
The chairman for the Nature Journal procurement was Vigilance Officer of DIAT who approved this procurement from local vendor.
In other cases the books/journals orders were recommended in dollars but Dr.A K Tyagi made payment in Pounds/Euro for the same procurement and bill was raised by with the help local vendors. Example – if book cost was approved by library committee in $ 360but when the payment was done that is 360 Pounds
The inquiry constituted to address this issue inspire of giving punishment the God Father Dr W Selvamurthy, CC R&D,DRDO than CC (HR) gave him safe passage and now DRDO Hqrs made him CPIO,DRDO Hqrs, Head RTI Cell and the best part of this
DRDO is exempted from RTI Act 2005 of Schedule-II only corruption & human right RTI entertained by DRDO so one can imagine the DRDO find most suitable corrupt official for the handling of RTI issues.
The finding of inquiry committee of DIAT (Board of Three Senior Officers)
1. Observations – To understand the existing procedure for procurement of Books by Library, it was necessary to go through basis of existing procedure, record and files to related to procurement. In absence of OI/C,IC&L very limited records made available by Library and after arrival of OI/C,IC&L access to information and records was totally denied to the Board of Officers.
2. Existing Procedure and Anomalies- the following is observed by Board of Officers.
i) OI/C,IC&L places demand directly to vendors after approval by Library Committee. There is no procedure of quotation/negotiation followed. it is noted that as per terms and conditions no discounts have been asked.
ii) Order has been placed on single tender basis
iii) During limited observations it was seen that Books were accepted at higher prices than the order/approval price by the purchase committee.
iv) No proof of price is being put up to the purchase Committee for approval.
v) Firm Orders are being placed by OI/C,IC&L without bidding/negotiation
vi) Vendors to whom orders are being placed are not registered. As per purchase procedure orders of only up to Rs 5000/- can be placed to unregistered vendors. This rule is not followed.
vii) In our limited inquiry, we observed that large numbers of books were
accepted at much higher price. We site few example-
a) Book ordered for Rs 6029.07 was procured for price Rs 81,936.00
b) Book ordered for Rs 13,156.00 was procured for price Rs 27,362.68
c) Book ordered for Rs 40,000.00 was procured for price Rs 3,60,00.00
d) Book ordered for Rs 3,292.24 was procured for price Rs 5,233.09
viii) We did not find any justification in orders or Terms & Conditions to accept such high billing prices for payment to venors.
ix) OI/C,IC&L did not conduct independent investigation regarding over valued books supplied by the vendors for their correct price.
x) We found such number of cases where over payment was cleaned by OI/C, IC&L and Finance Officer without amendment or without bringing to notice of approving authority or VC
xi) We did not find any power vested to OI/C,IC&L, Finance Officer to clear the over payment cases.
xii) Before payment to vendors, pre-auditing is mandatory (as per purchase procedure) No such pre auditing mechanism is found resulting in escaping the over payment cases from scrutiny and corrective action. We did not find any document or authority to exempt from pre –auditing.
xiii) Functioning of Library in case Library procurement was found devoid of adequate check and balance and control mechanism. We can conclude that OI/C,IC&L and Finance Officer flouted the principle of FR-21
Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal 21-Sunderwala, Raipur Dehradun-248008 Uttarakhand Cell No- 9411114879, Landline- 0135-2787750 e-mail- prabhu@dandriyal.com Copy of CVC letter dated 15/03/2011
Copy of CVC letter dated 17/03/2011

Copy of RTI to DIAT, DRDO, Pune
To Date 15th February 2011 The CPIO No RTI/DIAT/HARASS/14/2/2011Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005. In respect of online subscription of Nature magazine by DIAT, Pune
Note: – above required information is directly related to corruption and not come under schedule – II
Find the application fee for the request attached with this application. If you feel that above requested information does not pertain to your department then please follow the provisions of Section 6(3) of the RTI act 2005. Also as per the provision of the RTI Act 2005 please provide the details (Name and Designation) of the first appellate authority w.r.t. to your department with the reply to above request, where I may require file first appeal.
I do hereby declare that I am the citizen of India. Kindly provide me with the information at the address mentioned with the application. I request you to ensure that the information is provided before expiry of 30 day period after you have received the application.
Enclosed – Rs 10 Postal Order No 60E 172113
Regards
Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal 21-Sunderwala, Raipur Dehradun-248008 Phone – 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879, e-mail id prabhu@dandriyal.com website – www.corruptionindrdo.com

Copy of RTI request of Dr Rajiv Chauhan & CIC decision
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 308, B-Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066
File No.CIC/LS/A/2012/001219
Appellant Shri Rajiv Chauhan
Public Authority DRDO
Date of hearing 09.08.2012
Date of decision 09.08.2012
Facts :-
1. Heard today dated 09.08.2012. Appellant present. DRDO is represented by Shri
Deepak Mishra, Scientist ‘E’
2. The appellant had filed an RTI application dated 29.10.2011 seeking information
about the purchase of certain books and other materials by the Defence Institute of Armament Technology, Pune. This information was denied to him on the ground that DRDO is an exempted organisation. During the hearing, the appellant submits that he will be satisfied if he is given inspection of the file/files relating to the order placed by Dr. A.K. Tyagi, the then Library Incharge, DIAT, Pune, for online subscription of ‘Nature Magzine’ against payment of about Rs. 25 lacs
3. The appellant also produces a copy of the letter dated 14.3.2011 of Dr. S.S.Sirurmath, University Librarian, in which he had informed the appellant that copy of order and terms and conditions of Nature Magazine(on line) were not available. He expresses surprise at this response in as much as an order of Rs. 25 lacs could not have been placed without due processing in the file.
4. In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is hereby ordered that CPIO may give inspection of all records relating to the online subscription to the appellant or his representative in 05 weeks time.
Sd/-
( M.L. Sharma )
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against
application and payment of the charges, prescribed under the Act, to the CPIO of this
Commission.
( K.L. Das )
Deputy Registrar
Address of parties :-
1. The Scientist ‘F’ & CPIO, DRDO, RTI Cell,
314-A, B-Block, DRDO Bhawan,
New Delhi-110105.
2. 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.
IMPORTANT NOTE :-
The RTI information is related with the corruption of the CPIO of RTI Dr.A.K.TYAGI during the office-in charge ,information centre/ library & finance officer of DIAT (Defense institute of Advanced technology). So that the decision on my RTI decision given by- Deepak Mishra , Addl.Director, RTI Cell, DRDO BHAWAN , NEW DELHI-110105
3. Details of First Appellate Authority [FAA]:
3.1 Name/Designation of the FAA: Dr. ARUN KUMAR
3.2 Full Address of FAA: OS & DIRECTOR; DIRECTORATE OF PERSONNEL;
ROOM NO- 217, DRDO BHAWAN, NEW DELHI-110105
4. Dates of RTI application/first appeal:
4.1 To CPIO — 29 OCT 2011
4.2 To FAA: — 02 DEC 2011
5. Particulars of Decisions:
5.1 Reference No & Date of CPIO Decision:-
22nd NOV2011; RTI/01/2091/P/2011/0283; CPIO.DRDO HQ; NEW DELHI
5.2 Reference No & Date of FAA’s Decision:-
10 JAN 2012; RTI/02/2091/F/2011/114; Dr.Arun Kumar,OS & DOP , FAA,DRDO HQ
6. Dates of receipt of replies by appellant from:-
6.1 CPIO— 28 NOV2011
6.2 FAA: — 17 JAN 2012
7. Details of information sought:-
Kindly inform to you that Dr.A.K.Tyagi worked in DIAT (Defense Institute of Advanced Technology) as OI(office in charge),IC&L(Information centre & library) and Finance officer during his posting. Presently the CPIO at DRDO HQ, New Delhi. He has violated all procurement norms laid by DRDO authority vide there revised edition 1999,DRDO manual of Procedure for management of library & Technical Information Centers.-DRDO HQ, Ministry of Defense .Page no-25 para 4.2.3 no 4 terms for procurement of books; page no-33 para 4.3.4 terms for procurement of periodical publication. Above procedure were violated by Dr A.K Tyagi in his all procurements and misappropriate the government funds and misinterpreted the government rules for minting money for himself .The book purchase in DRDO the approval of library committee is obtain which selects the useful book/journals and then the normal purchasing procedure is followed the quotations are called and the lowest bidder gets the order. There are few publisher are whose books/journals have standard price and when order is placed it goes directly to publisher.
In Dr A K Tyagi cases most of orders were placed to local vendors in single tender basis. When the purchases of books by violating the all the rules Dr A K Tyagi surpassed the all the records and the budget limit was crossed five times( 30 Laks to 1.5 Corers). This action was noticed by all the DIAT officials and an inquiry committee was framed. The committee constituted by then Vice Chancellor a senior officer as chairman and two officer as board member,. When the committee starts the investigation most of the documents were denied by Dr A K Tyagi, somehow, the inquiry committee submitted its report. The amount of corruption was good enough to punish the official but as usual God father culture prevailing in DRDO helped him and gave him safe passage by transferring to DRDO Hqrs.
He purchased Nature journal, nature publishing group, 4 Crinan Street, London, United Kingdom via local vendor for Rs 25 Lakhs
Facts : Till date nobody from DIAT has seen the Nature Journal
This journal was not useful for DIAT as the same deals with life sciences and DIAT area is ARMAMENT ENGINEERING, APPLIED MATHEMATICS, METALLURGY, COMPUTER ENGINEERING, APPLIED PHYSICS, AEROSPACE ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL ENGINEERING, EXPLOSIVES & APPLIED CHEMISTRY, ELECTRONICS
The chairman for the Nature Journal procurement was Vigilance Officer of DIAT who approved this procurement from local vendor.
In other cases the books/journals orders were recommended in dollars but Dr.A K Tyagi made payment in Pounds/Euro for the same procurement and bill was raised by with the help local vendors. Example – if book cost was approved by library committee in $ 360 but when the payment was done that is 360 Pounds
The finding of inquiry committee of DIAT (Board of Three Senior Officers)
1. Observations – To understand the existing procedure for procurement of Books by Library, it was necessary to go through basis of existing procedure, record and files to related to procurement. In absence of OI/C,IC&L very limited records made available by Library and after arrival of OI/C,IC&L access to information and records was totally denied to the Board of Officers.
2. Existing Procedure and Anomalies- the following is observed by Board of Officers.
i) OI/C,IC&L places demand directly to vendors after approval by Library Committee. There is no procedure of quotation/negotiation followed. it is noted that as per terms and conditions no discounts have been asked.
ii) Order has been placed on single tender basis
iii) During limited observations it was seen that Books were accepted at higher prices than the order/approval price by the purchase committee.
iv) No proof of price is being put up to the purchase Committee for approval.
v) Firm Orders are being placed by OI/C,IC&L without bidding/negotiation
vi) Vendors to whom orders are being placed are not registered. As per purchase procedure orders of only up to Rs 5000/- can be placed to unregistered vendors. This rule is not followed.
vii) In our limited inquiry, we observed that large numbers of books were
accepted at much higher price. We site few example-
a) Book ordered for Rs 6029.07 was procured for price Rs 81,936.00
b) Book ordered for Rs 13,156.00 was procured for price Rs 27,362.68
c) Book ordered for Rs 40,000.00 was procured for price Rs 3,60,00.00
d) Book ordered for Rs 3,292.24 was procured for price Rs 5,233.09
viii) We did not find any justification in orders or Terms & Conditions to accept such high billing prices for payment to venors.
ix) OI/C,IC&L did not conduct independent investigation regarding over valued books supplied by the vendors for their correct price.
x) We found such number of cases where over payment was cleaned by OI/C, IC&L and Finance Officer without amendment or without bringing to notice of approving authority or VC
xi) We did not find any power vested to OI/C,IC&L, Finance Officer to clear the over payment cases.
xii) Before payment to vendors, pre-auditing is mandatory (as per purchase procedure) No such pre auditing mechanism is found resulting in escaping the over payment cases from scrutiny and corrective action. We did not find any document or authority to exempt from pre –auditing.
xiii) Functioning of Library in case Library procurement was found devoid of adequate check and balance and control mechanism. We can conclude that OI/C,IC&L and Finance Officer flouted the principle of FR-21
This is a case of the corruption so that the main object to take this information is to provide as an evidence before high power investigating officer / commission / higher courts in the interest of law and justice .
I want the following information’s as under-
S.No INFORMATION SOUGHT REPLY
1. Is it true that Dr. A.K.Tyagi worked in DIAT (Defense Institute of Advanced Technology) as OI(office in charge),IC&L(Information centre & library) and Finance officer during his posting. Presently the CPIO at DRDO HQ, New Delhi ?
Yes/No
2. Dr A K Tyagi OI/C,IC&L places demand directly to vendors after approval by Library Committee. There is no procedure of quotation / negotiation followed ? Yes/No
3. Dr A K Tyagi OI/C,IC&L has been placed orders on single tender basis? Yes/No
4. Vendors to whom orders are being placed are not
registered?
Yes/ No
5. Book cost was approved by library committee in US dollor 360 but when the payment was done that is 360 Pounds ?
Yes/No
6. Order copy and term, conditions for the nature Magazine is not available. So the order place by Dr. A.K.Tyagi for Nature Magazine verbally or in written? Pl. provide suitable reply with authentic documents.
I state that the information sought does not fall within the restriction in section 8 & 9 of the Act and to the best of my knowledge it pertains in the DRDO office contained & record. Above required information is directly related to corruption and not come under scheduled –II. I request to you please provide me the information by the speed post.
8. Brief facts of the case:-
I submitted my RTI application before the CPIO, DRDO, New Delhi on dt.29-10-2011. Cause for put up this application was the allegation of the corruption / misuse of the office by Dr.A.K.Tyagi . He violated all procurement norms laid by DRDO authority vide there revised edition 1999,DRDO manual of Procedure for management of library & Technical Information Centers.-DRDO HQ, Ministry of Defense .Page no-25 para 4.2.3 no 4 terms for procurement of books; page no-33 para 4.3.4 terms for procurement of periodical publication. Above procedure were violated by Dr A.K Tyagi in his all procurements and misappropriate the government funds and misinterpreted the government rules for minting money for himself .The book purchase in DRDO the approval of library committee is obtain which selects the useful book/journals and then the normal purchasing procedure is followed the quotations are called and the lowest bidder gets the order. There are few publisher are whose books/journals have standard price and when order is placed it goes directly to publisher. In Dr A K Tyagi cases most of orders were placed to local vendors in single tender basis. When the purchases of books by violating the all the rules Dr A K Tyagi surpassed the all the records and the budget limit was crossed five times( 30 Laks to 1.5 Corers). This action was noticed by all the DIAT officials and an inquiry committee was framed. The committee constituted by then Vice Chancellor a senior officer as chairman and two officer as board member,. When the committee starts the investigation most of the documents were denied by Dr A K Tyagi, somehow, the inquiry committee submitted its report. The amount of corruption was good enough to punish the official but as usual God father culture prevailing in DRDO helped him and gave him safe passage by transferring to DRDO Hqrs. He purchased Nature journal, nature publishing group, 4 Crinan Street, London, United Kingdom via local vendor for Rs 25 Lakhs
CPIO reply is not satisfactory and not as per the law because the RTI is related with the allegation of the corruption and not exempted under section 24(1) of the RTI Act-2005.
In Supreme Court civil Appeal no – 6454 clearly mentioned that- “37. The right to information is a cherished right. Information and right to information are intended to be formidable tools in the hands of responsible citizens to fight corruption and to bring in transparency and accountability.
The provisions of RTI Act should be enforced strictly and all efforts should be made to bring to light the necessary information under clause (b) of section 4(1) of the Act which relates to securing transparency and accountability in the working of public authorities and in discouraging corruption.”
I was not satisfied with the reply of CPIO,DRDO HQ, New Delhi, after that I submitted an appeal before FAA to take the information but the FAA of DRDO dismissed the appeal and failed to provide the information with the ref. of second schedule of the RTI Act & section 24(1) of the RTI Act-2005.
9. Reasons/grounds for this appeal:-
1- That the RTI application is related with the public information because the tenders generally published in news paper / internet for the purchasing of the books as per the DRDO manual of Procedure for management of library & Technical Information Centers.-DRDO HQ, Ministry of Defense .Page no-25 para 4.2.3 no 4 terms for procurement of books; page no-33 para 4.3.4 terms for procurement of periodical publication.
2- That this information is directly related with the corruption and misuse of the office and not come under section 24(1) of the RTI Act because the books/journals orders were recommended in dollars but Dr.A K Tyagi made payment in Pounds/Euro for the same procurement and bill was raised by with the help local vendors. Example – if book cost was approved by library committee in $ 360but when the payment was done that is 360 Pounds
3- In Dr A K Tyagi cases most of orders were placed to local vendors in single tender basis. When the purchases of books by violating the all the rules Dr A K Tyagi surpassed the all the records and the budget limit was crossed five times( 30 Laks to 1.5 Corers). This action was noticed by all the DIAT officials and an inquiry committee was framed. The committee constituted by then Vice Chancellor a senior officer as chairman and two officer as board member,. When the committee starts the investigation most of the documents were denied by Dr A K Tyagi, somehow, the inquiry committee submitted its report. The amount of corruption was good enough to punish the official but as usual God father culture prevailing in DRDO helped him and gave him safe passage by transferring to DRDO Hqrs.
4- That the main object to take this information is to provide as an evidence before High Power Investigating Officer/ Commissions / High Courts in the interest of law and justice.
10. Any other information in support of appeal:-
1- This RTI information is required to proof a corruption during the purchasing of the books / periodical publication.
2- Dr.A.K.Tyagi violated all procurement norms laid by DRDO authority vide there revised edition 1999,DRDO manual of Procedure for management of library & Technical Information Centers.-DRDO HQ, Ministry of Defense .Page no-25 para 4.2.3 no 4 terms for procurement of books; page no-33 para 4.3.4 terms for procurement of periodical publication. Above procedure were violated by Dr A.K Tyagi in his all procurements and misappropriate the government funds and misinterpreted the government rules for minting money for himself.
3- That this action was noticed by all the DIAT officials and an inquiry committee was framed. This committee was put up an adverse report to the authorities.
11. Prayer/relief sought for:-
I request your honor to pass an order to concern authority to provide the following information’s as under-
S.No INFORMATION SOUGHT REPLY
1. Is it true that Dr. A.K.Tyagi worked in DIAT (Defense Institute of Advanced Technology) as OI(office in charge),IC&L(Information centre & library) and Finance officer during his posting. Presently the CPIO at DRDO HQ, New Delhi ?
Yes/No
2. Dr A K Tyagi OI/C,IC&L places demand directly to vendors after approval by Library Committee. There is no procedure of quotation / negotiation followed ? Yes/No
3. Dr A K Tyagi OI/C,IC&L has been placed orders on single tender basis? Yes/No
4. Vendors to whom orders are being placed are not
registered?
Yes/ No
5. Book cost was approved by library committee in US dollor 360 but when the payment was done that is 360 Pounds ?
Yes/No
6. Order copy and term, conditions for the nature Magazine is not available. So the order place by Dr. A.K.Tyagi for Nature Magazine verbally or in written? Pl. provide suitable reply with authentic documents.
I state that the information sought does not fall within the restriction in section 8 & 9 of the Act and to the best of my knowledge it pertains in the DRDO office contained & record. Above required information is directly related to corruption and not come under scheduled –II. I request your honor to pass an order to concern authority to provide the information’s by the speed post.
(2)- I request your honor to pass an order in favor of the applicant as deemed fit as an any relief .
Personal Presence at hearing:- — YES
Declaration:-
I hereby state that the information and particulars given above are true to the best of my knowledge and belief. I also declare that this matter is not previously filed with this commission nor is pending with any Court or tribunal or authority.
Place: MEERUT
Date: —————-
Signature of appellant
Copy of procurement papers received during inspection at DIAT, DRDO, Pune







http://www.box.com/shared/static/f91de7748e360d0a4a10.pdf
Letter to PM _Defense to read click
Honorable Sir,
The government of India is putting all their honest effort to control corruption from all the government machineries. Today‘s the common man of our country is looking for strong Lokpal to restrict the corruption.
As citizen of India I have always raised my voice against corruption whenever I came across any information on corruption. In the 20 years of my service in DRDO, Ministry of Defence, I have witnessed a lot of corruption in my department. In the interest of my country I raised my voice and the fallout was that I am out from the service.
After RTI act, again the Government of India gave power to the common man to fight the evils of corruption and using the RTI I have pointed out several issues of corruption/nepotism/favoritism prevalent among the DRDO top officials. This is the major and sole reason of unproductivity and brain drain from DRDO.
DRDO is an organization which works under the cloud of secrecy and when the situation comes to face scenarios like the KARGIL WAR they simply cry for imported devices/ systems/ subsystems. This has been witnessed by the nation. Former army chief V.P. Malik, who led the army during the 1999 Kargil war, has said casualties in the conflict could have been reduced had the Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) “not come in the way” of acquiring weapon-locating radars. “We had one or two incidents particularly on the weapon locating radar. If the DRDO had not come in the way we would have got them before the Kargil war and that would have definitely reduced our casualties,” he told CNN-IBN.
I have started a website www.corruptionindrdo.com with the aim to provide a platform to DRDO employees to give feedback about corruption prevailing in DRDO and to generate awareness regarding the power of RTI. With the help and support from different government agencies we will succeed in eradicating corruption from DRDO.
In last 18th months of this mission our honorable defence minister acknowledged the issues and gave instruction for inquiries, CVC registered the cases; CIC also directed DRDO to provide information.
Result was –
Some example of corruption/nepotism/favoritism of DRDO
a) Ms. Swati Srivastava, D/o Dr. Arun Kumar, DOP,DRDO was selected Scientist ‘B’ through RAC (Recruitment and assessment centre of DRDO) Adv.no- 66 , item no 34 without having the required qualification for the post as published in the advertisement. The required qualification for the post was M.Sc – Biotechnology, where as the qualification of Swati Srivastava is M.Sc in Environmental Biology. Her father Dr. Arun Kumar, was the Addl. Director of the DRDO at that time. One RAC interview board external member of Ms. Swati Srivastava was her teacher. (Enclosed finding in Details)
b) Ms. Geetha D/o Dr W Silavamurthy, Chief Controller of Defence (R&D) o/o DRDO was selected through RAC (Recruitment & Assessment Centre of DRDO) Advertisement no-64 item no-83 – Scientist –‘C’ without completing the required qualification for the post as published in the advertisement as under –
Ms. Geetha is M.Sc (Biochemistry) and submitted her Ph.D during the selection, while she was not awarded the Ph.D degree or not completed three year research experience which is must before the selection of Scientist ’C’.
Her father was the Director at DIPAS/DRDO who constituted / approved the screening / selection committee of JRF (junior research fellowship) and awarded Rs.8000/- per month during JRF to her daughter Ms. Geetha.
It is a clear rule of RAC/DRDO to select the scientist ‘C’:-Essential :-
(i)- At least First Class Master Degree in science subject, mathematics or psychology or first class degree in engineering or technology or metallurgy from a recognized university or equivalent.
(ii)-Three year experience in research or design or development production in the required area.
(iii)- Weightage for higher qualification to be equated as research experience for lateral recruitment as under;
Post graduate degree in engineering – two years.
Doctorate degree in science or mathematics-three years.
Doctorate degree in engineering-four years. [ Encl- 1 ]
Note :- RAC web site clarify that the candidate’s Ph.D degree should be awarded up to the closing date as given in the advertisement for Scientist ‘C’ post.
Here, I want to clarify that Ms. Gheeta was not awarded Ph..D till the closing date as given in the advertisement
2. Some DRDO top officials using their position to help vendors. (Details already submitted to honorable minister and it was duly acknowledge vide letter No No 1409-VIP/RM/2011 dated 21st March 2011 & No 1409-VIP/RM/2236 dated 20th May 2011
3. As per Dr W Silavamurthy, Chief Controller of Defence (R&D) DRDO distributing Rs 900 crores to various institutions government, private, deemed universities, NGO’s etc. there is clear feedback from DRDO officials that in some cases manipulations are going on. Ideally there should be a nodal agency that should do proper scrutiny of funds distributed by various research board of DRDO.
4. Some DRDO top officials use their position and make money by giving false information like in case of HRA and transport allowances.
The big question is that why did the top officials at DRDO simply wait for 18 months to react against the website. They forget the constitutional rights of India which gives supreme power to the common man.
That main objective of this site has been to fight against the practices of corruption in Defence Research Development Organisation.
That a lot of visitors use this site to put up their views regarding the corrupt practices in DRDO, which after examination on the point of corruption are forwarded to the higher authorities and published on the website. Thus this is a work in the interest of the security of the state.
That nothing is affecting security of the state, friendly relations with foreign states, public order, decency and morality, contempt of court, defamation, incitement to an offence, sovereignty and integrity of India.
That freedom of speech and expression entitles a person to speak without any censorship or restriction. On the website there is already a DISCLAIMER: “The comments submitted by users on this website do not necessarily reflect my opinion. While I believe that everyone should be allowed to express his thoughts and views freely through this online platform, it does not mean that I endorse them in any manner. The information against corruption in DRDO uploaded on this website by me is backed up by appropriate documents, letters and evidences gathered through the Right to Information Act. If anybody wishes to challenge the authenticity of this information, they are welcome to contact me to seek further details. They can also seek direct clarifications from relevant authorities about these evidences. The whole and sole objective of this website is to expose the corrupt elements in DRDO and protect national security interests of the country. Exposing such elements does not mean that it is an effort to malign any individual or party for some personal reason or motive. My campaign is against a corrupt system and if this system is rectified, I will believe that the objective has been achieved and there is no need to take this up further.”
Fallout
Request
Thanking you
Regards, Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal 21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun-248008 Phone – 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879, e-mail id prabhudoon@dandriyal.com , website- www.corruptionindrdo.comEnclosed
Copy for Information and action please
Ex-DRDO man plots revenge by online slur – by Raj Shekhar, TNN | Dec 14, 2011, 01.13AM IST
DRDO official files complaint Dec 14, 2011 – JEHANGIR ALI | Age Corespondent New Delhi
Amar Ujala 15th December 2011
Mubarak Ansari , Thursday, June 23, 2011 AT 12:12 PM (IST)
PUNE: A local court has issued process against six officers of Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) for illegally dismissing a high ranking officer working with city-based High Energy Materials Research Laboratory HEMRL). Now, they have to be present before the court as accused and defend their action.
All the accused are attached to DRDO’s Directorate of Personnel (DOP), New Delhi.
Dr Rohidas Gopinath Taware (54) of Aundh had filed the criminal complaint in this regard. The accused have been identified as DOP’s Director Dr Arun Kumar, Associate Director VP Pande, Joint Director IB Arora, Joint Director BB Sharma, Deputy Director SB Yadav and Deputy Director Abhinavjeet Ojha. Surprisingly, except for the post of director, no other designation held by the other accused exists in DOP.
Taware, a gazetted group ‘A’ officer, was Technical Officer ‘B’ at HEMRL. “He joined service in 1983 and was illegally suspended on August 24, 2009, and then illegally dismissed on December 30 last year. His entire service period is spotless,’ states the complaint. It further added, “The DOP is the highest office which deals with the personal matters of central government servants in DRDO. But, the DOP is not the disciplinary authority of the complainant (Taware). As per the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, the disciplinary authority of gazetted group ‘A’ officer like the complainant is the Director General Research and Development, New Delhi .”
“Dr Arun Kumar suspended Taware under Rule 10 (1) of the CCS (CCA). But, as per the said rule, Kumar is not competent to sign the suspension order as only DGR&D is competent to suspend or take disciplinary action. Kumar had accepted this fact in his deposition as a defence witness in the inquiry proceedings against
Taware. A copy of the said deposition is on record. Prima facie, it makes out the case against all the accused punishable u/s 167 (Public servant framing an incorrect document with intent to cause injury) and 170 (personating a public servant) of the IPC,” observed JMFC PK Deshpande in his order dated June 13.
The other accused issued memo, penalty order, etc illegally. Taware’s counsel BR Barge said that Taware was dismissed as he had filed civil and criminal cases against his superiors. “In 2008, Taware had filed a civil suit for compensation due to inaction of his superiors who had allegedly erred in their duties. During deposition before a court, his superiors made defamatory allegations. Hence, we filed a criminal case for defamation. Both the cases are pending. A day before the defamation case was to come up for hearing, Taware was suspended for his alleged anti-department activities. His promotion was also put on hold and finally dismissed,” said Barge. The next hearing is on July 22.
Dear Friends
I have received a legal notice from Dr S R Vadera, Science ‘G’, Defence Laboratory, Jodhpur, regarding the letter which I have received by post in his name and the matter was related to the environment of Defence Laboratory, Jodhpur and posted on the website on 12th July 2011 and as you all are aware the website was hacked on 25th August 2011 and the same matter was not uploaded again.
In his legal notice he stated that some unknown person wrote a fake letter to Sh A K Anthony, Honorable Minister of Defence, GOI, 104, South Block by presenting himself as Dr Vadera and marked forged signature of Dr S R Vadera at the end of this fake/forged letter dared 05-06-2011.
Dr S R Vadera, Sc ‘G’ now wants to put his view regarding environment of Defence Laboratory, Jodhpur. The legal notice enclosed a letter which Dr S R Vadera, Sc ‘G’ sent to SA to RM and asked to publish that on the website
He also asked my regret regarding this episode.
Friends, you have already showed your faith in this website with your encouragement, comments and number of visits as well as your valuable suggestion and inputs.
I have received mails from almost every part of India and also received letter from Honorable Defence Minister, I am also in touch with all enforcement agencies related to corruption/ nepotism issues lying in DRDO.
The aim of object of this website is to help DRDO management improve the atmosphere and remove the corruption/ nepotism/ harassment prevailing in DRDO. There is no any intention to defame or harm the prestige of any individual.
In case of Dr S R Vadera, Sc ‘G’, I am sorry that his name was used by some unknown person and same was published on my website. The inconvenience and pain caused by this act is highly and sincerely regret/apology from my side.
The letter of Dr S R Vadera, Sc ‘G’, view in respect of environment of Defence Laboratory, Jodhpur is publish herewith. Most of my reader viewers are from DRDO and they know the real scenario and will understand the situation and will continue their blessing to me for fighting the cause.
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- Letter of Dr S R Vadera, Sc ‘G’, Defence Laboratory, Jodhpur
2- Letters from Honorable Defence Minister



As the honorable Defence Minister of India, this is your second successive tenure. The first one had limitation of weak government, as the number was not adequate and the survival of the government itself was always in doubt. As a result your Ministry did not commit ACCOUNTABILITY in R&D organization which is an important factor. In the new government, a strong majority prevails and therefore it is expected that you will discharge your duties as expected by the common citizen/tax payer of India.
As the Defence Minister, Late Sh. Viswanath Partap Singh adjudged DRDO scientist and manpower as social commitment, at the 1986 Directors’ conference at Bangalore. The obvious reason was that products developed by DRDO were Nil.. Today, even after 23 years, the output of DRDO remain Nil and it has not delivered a single item, 100% indigenous, due to following reason :-
1. There is no accountability in DRDO.
2. DRDO consumes a major share of the Defence budget but it has failed to deliver a single indigenous product useful for Indian Defence forces. Some defence officers raise their voices, but it is not heeded by the authority..
3. In the name of technology development DRDO rely on the import of current technology ( normally declared obsolete by Russia,USA, Israel, France etc)
4. The imported items are shown/demonstrated to users (ARMY/Navy/Air force). When it comes to mass development the actual fight begins between PSU’s and DRDO. It is because DRDO does not know the inherent property and fails to prepare proper TOT as required.
5. DRDO directors are bluff-masters. They act as if DRDO Labs are autonomous bodies. They have been trained by their predecessors to bluff and simply bluff. The Minister normally does not ask technical questions as a result DRDO has become a bluff-masters’ paradise.
6. The knowledge/higher degree is an optional requirement. DRDO rely on fresh B.Tech engineers and groom them to continue the bluff. If they disagree then they are forced to reign. See the number of DRDO scientists who’ve resigned in past 25 years.
Sir, will you please look into the grievances of the poor tax payers. Can you ask SA to RM to count in fingers what products DRDO has given so far and must judge in the light of North Korea’s and China’s capabilities.
You are working on P Rama Rao committee which intends to ameliorate DRDO, but through news we know that the bluff-masters of DRDO have already succeeded in diluting the action.