Tag Archives: Mr. R. Sathish

PIL STATUS – DMSRDE Case

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 3610/2015 & CM No.6436/2015 (for directions).

PRABHU  DANDRIYAL ….. Petitioner

Through: Mr. R. Sathish, Adv.

versus

UNION OF INDIA & ORS ….. Respondents

Through: Mr. Anil Soni, CGSC and Naginder

Benipal, Adv. for R-1 to 3.

Mr. R.V. Sinha and Mr. A.S. Singh,

Advs. for R-5.

Mrs. Rajdipa Behura, SSP with Mrs.

Monica Gupta, Adv. for R-8.

CORAM:

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW

O R D E R

27.05.2015

Heard both parties.

The learned counsel appearing for the respondents no.1 to 3 states that the report of the Fact Finding Inquiry is ready and the same will be filed in a sealed cover during the course of the day.

Judgment reserved.

CHIEF JUSTICE

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J

Strange thing of this case is no above mentioned respondents Advocates were physical present there.

Second is  the request of respondents no.1 to 3 for  submit the report of  Fact Finding Inquiry will be filed in a sealed cover.

It itself proves that DRDO afraid to show the fact finding committee reports because the corruption will be expose or manipulation in fact finding inquiry will be expose.

Same report is also asked by Loksabha unstarred question no 6929, any how matter will going to expose either by High court or by Loksabha.

PIL status – Fact Finding Inquiry has already been held and he undertakes to place before this Court the inquiry report.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT New Delhi

+ W.P.(C) 3610/2015 & C.M.No.6436/2015 (directions)

PRABHU DANDRIYAL ….. Petitioner

Through: Mr.R.Sathish, Adv. with Mr.Mohan Das K.K., Adv.

 Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS…..

Respondents Through: Mr.Sanjay Jain, ASG

with Mr.Anil Soni, Ms.Aastha Jain, Mr.Akash Nagar, Advs. for R-1 to 3.

Mr.R.V.Sinha, Adv. for R-5/CVC. Mr.R.V.Sinha.

with Mrs.Monica Gupta, Adv. for CBI.

CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW

ORDER  29.04.2015 C.M.No.7764/2015 (exemptions) Exemptions allowed subject to all just exceptions. W.P.(C) No.3610/2015

The learned ASG appearing for the respondents, on instructions

States that the Fact Finding Inquiry has already been held and he undertakes to place before this Court the inquiry report.

Re-notify on 27.05.2015. CHIEF JUSTICE APRIL 29, 2015/‘anb’ RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J

Dear Friends see the DRDO statement in Delhi Court, the whole country is witness the unprecedented delays in all major projects and same manner DRDO misleading the honorable High Court, Delhi

DRDO is applying same tactics in Delhi High Court by stating that Fact Finding Inquiry has already been held and he undertakes to place before this Court the inquiry report in second appearance and again asked for time.

See the facts

The First Fact Finding Inquiry Committee headed by Dr S S Negi, Sc H, members Shri Manoj Bali , Scientist ‘G’ and Shri Jagdeep, Scientist ‘F’ visited A on 13th – 14th, March 2014 for inquiry on the complaint submitted against Dr. A K Saxena

What submitted by First Fact finding Committee

As per Sh D N Tripathi, Sc F, Addl. Director Administration and Finance, DMSRDE, Kanpur submitted supplementary counter affidavit to Honorable  CAT, Allahabad on 4 June 2014

  1. Fact finding not found any truth for complaint submitted by Sh Navin Praksh Gupta and Prabhu Dandriyal and thus dropped and rejected.
  2. Prabhu Dandriyal was terminated by DRDO (Stated without proof and will pay for that will be filed criminal case against Sh D N Tripathi, Sc F, Addl. Director Administration and Finance, DMSRDE, Kanpur in Dehradun Court)
  3. Photo copy of Fact Finding Report submitted in honorable CAT Allahabad as annexure SCA-3. (It means DRDO having readily available fact finding report the why they wasted precious time of honorable Delhi High Court)

As per Dr A K Singh Letter DOP/DS/008/M/01 dated 28 May 2014to Director, DMSRDE, Kanpur.

Brief facts on the basis of Fact Finding committee – Interestingly fact finding was constituted to find out facts of corruption related allegations within the procurement files.

But Chairman FFIC, Dr S S Negi who is Dr (PhD) on Semiconductor Devices turns Dr on psychology and forgot the procurement related corruption allegation, started the analyses of behavior and life style of Sh R P Bhatt, Sc’F’ and Sh N P Gupta, Sc ‘C’

Committee certified that – Sh R P Bhat, Sc’F’ is a habitual drunkenness, misbehavior, threatening and harassment to others, including the transfer to other lab. The question is it was in the purview of Dr. Negi & team or if it is correct than how Sh R.P Bhatt promoted up to Sc ‘F’, is Dr Negi team gone through the last 5 years APAR of Sh R P Bhatt any negative comment of Dr A K Saxena was there?

Committee suggested that – Necessary action to be initiated against Sh R P Bhat, Sc’F’

Dr. Negi & team can able to stand with their statement in front of High Court, Allahabad?

As Sh R P Bhatt challenged is transfer on the basis of recommendations of Fact Finding Committee

Basically Dr. Negi is very good in scientific work but very poor in administration and management, after assumption of charge as Director, IRDE every day he is facing lot of irregularities of employees and scientists, Union running the local administrations of IRDE, like internal posting /transfer, safety shoe purchase without proper specification, who will go for TD, who will be chair for different investigation enquiries, whom to serve warnings, to whom to give AMC, to whom to give man power supplies, who will sit in security and all sundry things

Second Fact finding Committee

Shri Avinash Chander , DGR&D and SA to RM constituted second four members  FFIC under Chairmanship of Dr. D C Pande, Outstanding Scientist, LRDE, Bangalore  and members Shri Hari babu Srivastva, Director, LASTEC, New Delhi, Shri R S Mehta, Joint Director, Dte of Vigilance& Security, DRDO Hqrs, Shri Jagdeep, Scientist ‘F’,Dte of Materials Management DRDO Hqrs  reached at Kanpur on 9th July early morning 5:00 AM at DMSRDE, Guest House, Kanpur by Rewa Express.

As per sources the second Fact finding Committee asked all procurement related files and found lot of irregularities, but the Sh Avinash Chander and Dr A K Singh both were given assurance to Dr A K Saxena, the reason only know to them or GOD.

The website have all documentary evidences to prove the corruption allegations, it is expected that DRDO have no choice to send all these cases for CBI inquiry and website will submit all those evidences to CBI, which website continuously receiving.

See the DRDO efficiency till date DRDO not take any action on the basis of second fact finding committee reports or neither had they submitted the fact finding report to CVO, MOD.

As Director (Vigilance), MOD has sought Director (Vigilance & Security), DRDO for consolidated report by his letter dated 04 August 2014.

PIL – Dr A K Saxena- Respondent Seeks time – Next Date – 29 April 2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 3610/2015, CMs No.6436/2015 (for directions) & 6437/2015

(for exemption)

PRABHU DANDRIYAL ….. Petitioner

Through: Mr. R. Sathish, Adv.

Versus

UNION OF INDIA & ORS ….. Respondents

Through: Mr. Sanjay Jain, ASG with Mr. Anil Soni and Mr. Naginder BEnipal,

Advs. for R-1 to 3.

Mr. R.V. Sinha and Mr. A.S. Singh,

Advs. for R-5/CVC.

Ms. Rajdipa Behura, Adv. for

R-8/CBI.

CORAM:

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW

O R D E R

15.04.2015

Mr. Anil Soni, learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents seeks time to get instructions.

Re-notify on 29th April, 2015.

CHIEF JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.

APRIL 15, 2015

bs

DRDO RTI Cell Trying to take shelter of High Court Order

DRDO RTI cell doing propaganda that Honorable High Court declared DRDO 100%   exempted  organization from RTI Act-2005 and started giving denial  to each and every RTI request without seeing the merit and facts that the request pertain to corruption. And best part of this now they are stop writing “except information pertaining to the allegations of corruption and human rights violations”

RTI cell including First appellate authority also cited the Delhi High Court Judgment passed in WP © 83/2014 DR. NEELAM BHALLA .. Petitioner Through: Mr. R. Sathish, Advocate. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..Respondents Through: Mr. Neeraj Chaudhari, Advocate for R-1 and 2.

In this judgment is nothing new every one clearly knows DRDO was an exempted organization under Section 24 of the Right to Information Act, 2005. In other words, the Act would apply to DRDO only to the extent of information pertaining to allegations of corruption and human rights violations.

In DR. NEELAM BHALLA case  DR. NEELAM BHALLA  prayer to honorable court that information supplied by then CPIO, DRDO  Sh Bundella was incorrect and inaccurate and court says

“4. It is a matter of fact that Shri Bundela had provided inaccurate and incorrect information to the appellant but Shri Bundela’s contention that he had transmitted information as received by him from CPIO of RAC cannot be disregarded. It is important to bear in mind that Shri Bundela was not the holder of information. The holder of information was CPIO, RAC. Whatever information was W.P.(C) No. 83/2014 Page 1 of 4 forwarded to Shri Bundela by CPIO, RAC, he transmitted the same to the appellant.

6. Even so, before parting with this matter, I would like to caution Shri Bundela to exercise due diligence in responding to the RTI application in future.”

4. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the view that once the CIC has held that DRDO is an exempted organisation under Section 24 of RTI Act and the information sought does not pertain to corruption and/or human rights violation, it was not open to the CIC to carve out any further exemption.

But in whole judgment there is nothing new and not giving extra immunizing to DRDO from RTI act, if there is any extra facilitation in judgment than DRDO should quote specifically that.

  1. DRDO RTI cell also go through the judgment of  CWP No. 12904 of 2009

In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE  MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR

under Section 24(4) of the Act which envisaged that nothing contained in this Act shall apply to such intelligence and security organizations A combined reading of these provisions would reveal, only that information is exempted, which is directly effecting and co-related to the “Intelligence” and “Security” of that organization of the State and not otherwise.

The matters pertaining to recruitment/appointments and day to day administrative nature information, where it is also found that DRDO top officials did lot of irregularities. Therefore honorable defence minister approved CBI intervention against 10 top DRDO officials including 2 ex- DRDO chiefs one Dr V K Saraswat and other one Sh M Natrajan  for their ugly acts.

It was establish facts till date all senior officials of DRDO who were fixed by CVC and CVO, MOD were exposed with the help of RTI’s only.

So DRDO officials are afraid of RTI’s if they are honest then why they worries from RTI’s . The Ex CPIO, DRDO Dr A K Tyagi who is facing charge sheet in corruption case was the big manipulator and protector of corrupt officials.

I request to DRDO RTI cell you people are serving to our nation; please not to protect culprit’s corrupt officers, your younger generation will ask you what did you contributed for justice. Now in the age of IT revolution era kid can explore what are the score of my grandpa, because these documents are alive forever.

I want to appeal all information seeker from DRDO please don’t dishearten from these act of these corrupt DRDO officials who are taking false shelter.

Please mail/post/send ordinary dak all your queries to www.corruptionindrdo.com postal address or mail address, we will took the matter up to higher ups. We are also planning to filled a PIL for request supreme court for delist the name of DRDO from Second Schedule of RTI Act 2005. As we collected lot of of informations from all over the country.

regrads
www.corruptionindrdo.com
prabhudoon@gmail.com
21- Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun- 248001