Tag Archives: officials

Request for assign scientific work to DR. A.K. SINGH, DIRECTOR, Dte of Personnel (DOP), DRDO HQ so that he could not influence the probe and temper the evidences and not able to protect DRDO’s corrupt officials and also not able to support corrupt DRDO directors to harass the whistle blowers.

To                                                                                                       20th February 2015
Hon’ble
Shri Manohar Parrikar,
Defence Minister,
Min. of Defence, Room No -104, South Block
New Delhi-110011
 

SUBJECT

Request for assign scientific work to DR. A.K. SINGH, DIRECTOR, Dte of Personnel (DOP), DRDO HQ so that he could not influence the probe and temper the evidences and not able to protect DRDO’s corrupt officials and also not able to support corrupt DRDO Directors to harass the whistle blowers.

Honourable Sir,

It is requested to sake of DRDO image, productivity, to save money to curtailing in court cases, to protect honest scientists and whistle blowers please reshuffle immediately the DRDO scientists who are involved in non scientific assignments since 10 -15 years and main reason of DRDO’s current non productive image. These incompetent scientists are great example of exemplary carrier growth without doing science in DRDO.  Dr. A.K. Singh, Director, Dte of Personnel (DOP), DRDO HQ case is on the top, Dr R K Jain who is the boss of Scientists recruitment centre master mind of pushing all incompetent scientists on the top and country facing tremendous loss in respect of technology development, in respect of wastage in money and he was enjoyed his three consequent out staying promotion without doing science.

Sir, if you ask young real scientists, not incompetent ones, who come through LDCE will certainly going to pin point these two great scientists the main reason behind the downfall of DRDO.

The DRDO is great organisation in term of HR qualification enhancement. There are hundreds of examples where someone joined DRDO as peon/security guard or casual labour or Technician and within five to 10 years year span he become Technical Officer or in some cases scientists.

If you enquire DRDO regarding this kind of example of fake qualifications you will found thousands of degree diploma cases from unrecognised centre without doing study only managed. This is the major reason of DRDO’s corruption, nepotism and above all degradation of DRDO HR quality.

On 15th February 2015 DRDO, RAC conducted the limited departmental examination for scientist ‘B’ post for DRDO’s employees, you will find more than 90% cases candidates not having properly UGC or ACETE or DCE approved degrees. The certificates they enclosed are from recognised universities or institutes but the process of acquiring degrees are totally not recognised as per UGC norms.

And best part is that these two duos (Dr A K Singh & Dr. R K Jain) are the key persons to organise the game plan the application format was designed such a way that the degree acquiring process not able to revealed the ineligibility of candidate..

But interestingly till date they have not found single case only with the help of RTI four high profile cases were exposed resulted two scientists job was annulled and two are under process and Ex Defence Minister approved for CBI inquiry on 14th  October 2013 and also given approval for reconsider the DRDO recruitments through UPSC,

Sir, if government is serious about to revamp DRDO and make it productive worth organisation than first thing scarp RAC & CEPTAM immediately. These two bodies are engaged almost more than 25 scientists and number of technical manpower. Both establishments are den of corruption and nepotism. Because of these two establishments DRDO getting third grade manpower.

Main evidence of these establishments working screens the recruitments and promotions and court cases and RTIs which are sufficient to justify the above statement.

I have filed following complaints against Dr. A.K. Singh, Director, Dte of Personnel (DOP), DRDO HQ.

DM letter table 20 feb
DM letter table 20 feb

In this connection I got Letter No. DVS/02/2053/P/63 dated 12 Feb 2015 from Dte of Vigilance & Security, DRDO, Min. of Defence, DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg, New Delhi for confirmation to my complaint dated 14 Nov 2014 to Hon’ble Defence Minister (mentioned at sr. no. 4 above). Copy enclosed as Annexure-1 and I sent the confirmation vide letter dated 20 Feb 2015. Copy enclosed as Annexure-2.

Sir, on 25 March 2014 the Supreme Court of India told N. Srinivasan to step down as BCCI president so that a fair investigation may be conducted. The court found it “nauseating” that he should hold on to the post despite various courts censuring him.

On 27th November,2014 the Supreme Court said that N Srinivasan’s conflict of interest was “obvious” as he also owned a team i.e. CSK in the IPL. The court also asked BCCI if it was open to have fresh polls for a new board without N Srinivasan.

Accordingly Mr. N.Srinivasan announced that he was stepping aside from the post of President of the BCCI until the probe was completed ostensibly.

[CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4235 OF 2014 with CIVIL APPEAL NO.4236 OF 2014 and SLP (C) No.34228 of 2014 , Supreme Court Of India]

In the light of the above facts stated above, I kindly request  that for fair probe on complaints against Dr. A.K. Singh, Director, DOP, and request assigned him some other scientific assignment as per his credentials  so that he could not influence the probe and temper the evidences. Because he always boast up that his father was great police officer and that’s why I have able to retain bungalow at 14-B, Mother Teresa Crescent, New Delhi-110011 along with ministers. He also protects corrupt DRDO officials and supports them in lodging false FIR against the whistle blowers.

As Dr. A.K. Singh, Director (Personnel), DRDO HQ, New Delhi using his position to harass number of DRDO scientists like

Dr Gausal Azam Kahn, Sc ‘D’, DIPAS on the demand of his sister Dr Sahshi Bala Singh, Director, DIPAS He cooked false charge sheet against him who was joined DRDO direct Scientist D in DRDO NRI scheme,  

Sh N P Gupta, Sc ‘C’, DMSRDE a computer science background scientist thrown to Life Science Lab, DRL, Tezpur just because to protect corrupt Dr A K Saxena, Director, DMSRDE,

Sh D Muthuraja, Scientist E was shunted to ACME Nashik without work as he did complaint against the wrong deeds of Sh Guruprasad, Director, R&D Eng. of making Rath in R&D premises without any fear and wasted precious  poor tax payers money and DRDO manpower (two parliamentarian already raised question in zero hour on 18th December 2014)  

As per sources you might be received answer from Sh Guru Parsad , Director, R&D Eng., DRDO, Pune the bullock story   “making of Rath was not just devotional activity but also interesting technical task. Apart from saving bullock burden”

On last August DRDO award ceremony our Prime Minister mentioned to DRDO scientist please do something to reduce weight of our soldiers uniform like light weight shoes etc. That time our PM not aware of DRDO’s kind hearted scientists who already spent 5 corers Rs to saving bullock burden.

Dr A K Singh gave his all administrative supports to harass above scientists, Sir there are 100 of cases available their Dr A K Singh supporting Lab directors in ACR/APAR cases, promotions cases specially in minorities etc, Sir, It is requested please ask the total amount spend by DRDO in various court cases like CATs/District Courts/High courts and Supreme Court in Dr A K Singh tenure it is self explanatory of his administrative capability and degrading HR quality and image of DRDO.

With warm regards,

 (Prabhu Dandriyal)
21- Sunderwala, Raipur
Dehradun-248008
E-Mail- prabhudoon@gmail.com, Web www.corruptionindrdo.com   

 

I smell malicious intention by DRDO officials, claims former Agni V programme director RK Gupta

Pranay Upadhyay, CNN-IBN Feb 06, 2015 at 12:35pm IST
New Delhi: A day after the project director of nuclear-capable Agni 5 missile programme at DRDO RK Gupta was removed, a letter has surfaced in which he has claimed that he was targeted by former DRDO chief Avinash Chander.
“I feel dishonoured the way I was treated. I smell malicious intention. My whole family is undergoing mental agony. In case of any untoward incident or accident, I fix responsibility on Dr Avinash Chander and Dr VG Sekaran,” Gupta writes in his letter.
Gupta was removed as director of Agni V programme a day after a successful test. While DRDO sources termed the transfer as “routine”, the officer alleged that he was singled out by two senior officials within the organisation including former chief Avinash Chander, who demitted his office on January 31.

 While DRDO sources termed the transfer as "routine", the officer alleged that he was singled out by two senior officials within the organisation including former chief Avinash Chander, who demitted his office on January 31.
While DRDO sources termed the transfer as “routine”, the officer alleged that he was singled out by two senior officials within the organisation including former chief Avinash Chander, who demitted his office on January 31.

Gupta has complained to the Defence Ministry that he received the letter, dated January 9, only on February 2 when he reached his office after the successful launch.
“With all humility and respect, I wish to bring to your notice that on February 2, I was relinquished from the post of project director Agni-V. I am shocked that such bad treatment is meted out to such a senior scientist with an excellent track record throughout service tenure,” he said in his letter to Defence Secretary RK Mathur, who is also holding the additional charge of DRDO.
Incidentally, Gupta’s name had come up in connection with the sudden termination of Chander’s contract by the government, 15 months ahead of his tenure.
It was then rumoured that one of the reasons for Chander’s removal was three complaints filed by individuals including by Gupta who has denied any such move.

RTI – PMO – Interact with Hon’ble Prime Minister of India

To                                                                                                   Date – 26th January 2015
Shri Syed Ekram Rizwi,
Director & Central Public Information Officer,
Prime Minister’s Office,
South Block,
New Delhi – 110011

 

Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in respect of  PMO website regarding Interact with Honorable Prime Minister of India. It is observed that when citizen of India submitted some feedback, suggestions to improve system or information regarding misuse of fund & power by authorities, PMO officials are taking these inputs as personal grievances of individuals rather than taking inputs in national interest. The PMO officials forwarding that information directly to concern organizations without concealing the name of individuals, it may be affect the carrier of individual or authorities can target to harass the individual.

  1. Kindly provide the PMO policy for handling the inputs receiving in Interact with Honorable Prime Minister of India.
  2. Whether government officials can send feedbacks of their respective organization.
  3. PMO officials who are handling these inputs/feedbacks/infarctions are permitted to disclose the name of individual to his/her department superiors.
  4. Whether government officials who are submitting inputs in PMO website in Interact with Honorable Prime Minister of India are violating CCS (Conduct) Rule 1964, Rule 20 or any other CCS Rules (Yes/No)

 

Regards

Prabhu  Dandriyal,
21-Sunderwala, Raipur,
Phone 0135- 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,
e-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com  website www.corruptionindrdo.com
 
 Registration Number     PMOIN/R/2015/60215

Request for the sanction of fund from Prime Minister’s relief fund for filing PIL

To                                                                                                             9th December 2014
Honorable Shri Narendra Modi
Prime Minister
PMO, Room No -102 South Block
New Delhi-110011

SUBJECT: Request for the sanction of fund from Prime Minister’s relief fund for filing PIL

Honorable Sir,

                          The foul smell coming out of DRDO in particular the misuse of government funds and misinterpretation of government rules have been sent to successive government since 2001.

So far barring a few dent the fundamental change expected by countryman have not been observed, may the reason known to successive Defence Ministers.

There was growing hope of countries scientific fraternity and as well as common man of India that Honorable Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi ji will take appropriate action against the corrupt officials of DRDO. When several cases of extensions were put up for approval it was denied. The culprits were furious and looking for safe exit, however, when the contractual appointment of Sh Avinash Chander, DG, DRDO, SA to RM, Secretary, DRD was continued, the message delighted the corrupt officials, operating within the four walls of DRDO.

DRDO can spend government fund for manufacturing Silver Rath of Rs 2.5 Crores without having any approval from competent authority. The existence of Controller Defence Accounts is also not visible. And above all our government is keep mum on this unethical, irresponsible act of DRDO bosses.

Sir, an enclosed PIL is almost ready for submission to honorable court and we seek financial assistance for national interest from Prime Minister’s relief fund as court expenditure for the sake timely action to save premier defence organisation of the country.

Thanking You

Prabhu Dandriyal
www.corruptionindrdo.com
21-Sunderwala, Raipur.Dehradun-248008

Enclosed –  Public interest litigation (PIL)                 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT DELHI

*****

I N D E X

IN

CIVIL MISC. WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO.                 OF 2014

(Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India)

(DISTRICT: DELHI)

Prabhu Dandriyal

…Petitioner

Versus

  1. Union of India through the Cabinet Secretary, Government of India, Cabinet Secretariat, Rashtrapati Bhavan, New Delhi and others.

…Respondentsindex1

index2

index3

 

Dated _____________ 2014

(                                                    )

Advocate

Counsel for the petitioner

Chamber No.         High Court, Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

*****

LIST OF RELEVANT DATES & EVENTS

IN

CIVIL MISC. WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO.                 OF 2014

(Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India)

(DISTRICT: DELHI)

Prabhu Dandriyal son of Late Shri R N Dandriyal

Resident of 21, Sunderwala, Raipur Road, Dehradun-248008

…Petitioner

Versus

  1. Union of India through the Cabinet Secretary, Government of India, Cabinet Secretariat, Rashtrapati Bhavan, New Delhi-110011.
  2. Secretary, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions, Government of India, North Block , New Delhi-110011.
  3. Secretary, Ministry of Defence, South Block, New Delhi-110011
  4. Shri Bhanu Pratap Sharma, Special Secretary and Establishment Officer, DOPT, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions, Government of India, North Block , New Delhi-110011.

…Respondentsevents1

 

events2

 

events3

 

Dated _____________ 2014

(                                                    )

Advocate

Counsel for the petitioner

Chamber No.         High Court, Delhi

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

*****

         CIVIL MISC.  STAY APPLCIATION No.               OF 2014

(Under Chapter XXII Rule 1 of the High Court Rules)

         On behalf of:-

PRABHU DANDRIYAL, 21, SUNDERWALA, RAIPUR ROAD , DEHRADUN-248008

Petitioner

IN

CIVIL MISC. WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO.                 OF 2014

(Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India)

(DISTRICT: DELHI)

Prabhu Dandriyal son of Late Shri R N Dandriyal

Resident of 21, Sunderwala, Raipur Road, Dehradun-248008

…Petitioner

Versus

  1. Union of India through the Cabinet Secretary, Government of India, Cabinet Secretariat, Rashtrapati Bhavan, New Delhi-110011.
  2. Secretary, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions, Government of India, North Block , New Delhi-110011.
  3. Secretary, Ministry of Defence, South Block, New Delhi-110011.
  4. Shri Bhanu Pratap Sharma, Special Secretary and Establishment Officer, DOPT, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions, Government of India, North Block , New Delhi-110011.

…Respondents

To,

The Hon’ble the Chief Justice and his other companion  judges of the aforesaid court.   The humble application on behalf of above named, Petitioner, Most     Respect fully Showeth as under:

That the full facts and circumstances of the case have been stated in the accompanying writ petition (PIL), which forms part of this application.

PRA YER

It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to quash the appointment letter dated 31 May 2013 and direct the Respondent No. 1 & 2  to ensure the cancellation of appointment on contract (contractual appointment) of  Shri Avinash Chander who is presently holding charge of Director General R&D, DRDO, Scientific Advisor to Raksha Mantri and  Secretary , Department of Defence R&D on contract with effect from 01 December 2014.

It is further prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue orders to respondent no. 1 to investigate all the complaint made against Shri Avinash Chander to Hon’ble Prime Minister of India, PMO in time bound manner and submit the inquiry report before this Hon’ble Court within one month.

During the pendency of the present Writ Petition(PIL) , and/ or pass such other and further order which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of  the  case.

Dated _____________ 2014

(                                                    )

Advocate

Counsel for the petitioner

Chamber No.         High Court, Delhi

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT DELHI

*****

CIVIL MISC. WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO.                 OF 2014

(Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India)

(DISTRICT: DELHI)

Prabhu Dandriyal son of Late Shri R N Dandriyal

Resident of  21, Sunderwala, Raipur Road, Dehradun-248008

…Petitioner

Versus

  1. Union of India through the Cabinet Secretary, Government of India, Cabinet Secretariat, Rashtrapati Bhavan, New Delhi-110011.
  2. Secretary, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions, Government of India, North Block , New Delhi-110011.
  3. Secretary, Ministry of Defence, South Block, New Delhi-110011.
  4. Shri Bhanu Pratap Sharma, Special Secretary and Establishment Officer, DOPT, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions, Government of India, North Block , New Delhi-110011.

…Respondents

To,

The Hon’ble the Chief Justice and his other companion Judges of the aforesaid court.

The humble application on behalf of above named, Petitioner, Most Respectfully Showeth as under:

  1. That this is the first Public Interest Litigation filed on behalf of the petitioner on the subject before this Hon’ble Court and no other Writ Petition/Public Interest Litigation has been filed with the same cause of actio
  2. That the Petitioner has not received any caveat as yet from any of the respondents. The expenditure of the petition is managed by the petitioner himself.
  3. That the petitioner has no personal grudge against any one and the purpose of filing this Public Interest Litigation is not to harm anyone with any personal motive.
  4. That the Petitioner has neither personal interest in the matter nor any grudge against anybody in filing the Public Interest Litigation. The Petitioner is totally devoted to promote transparency and accountability and ensure to contain corruption in post-retirement appointment on contract of Shri Avinash Chander posted on contract as Director General R&D, DRDO, Scientific Advisor to Raksha Mantri and Secretary , Department of Defence R&D  for 18 weeks with effect from 01 December 2014 to 31 May 2016.
  5. That under the provisions of Government of India(Allocation of Business) Rules 1961 , Allocation of Business – The business of the Government of India shall be transacted in the Ministries, Departments, Secretariats and Offices specified in the First Schedule to these rules and the distribution of subjects among the departments shall be as specified in the Second Schedule to these Rules.
  6. That Department of Defence Research and Development (Raksha Anusandhan aur Vikas Vibhag) is under Ministry of Defence in First Schedule of AOB Rules 1961 and under the provisions of The Second Schedule (Rule 3) of AOB Rules 1961, the Distribution of Subjects Among The Departments for the Department of Defence Research and Development is annexed as Annexure-A1 to this PIL.
  7. That under the provisions of Rule 2(i) of CCS(CCA) Rules 1965 the Head of Department is defined as “head of the department” for the purpose of exercising the powers as appointing, disciplinary, appellate or reviewing authority, means the authority declared to be the head of the department under the Fundamental and Supplementary Rules or the Civil Service Regulations, as the case may be.
  8. That under the provisions of Rule 2(j) of CCS(CCA) Rules 1965 the Head of Office is defined as “head of the office” for the purpose of exercising the powers as appointing, disciplinary, appellate or reviewing authority, means the authority declared to be the head of the office under the General Financial Rules.
  9. That Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) is an organisation under Department of Defence R&D, Ministry of Defence. Head of Department and Head of Office in DRDO is Secretary , Department of Defence R&D who is also holding posts of Director General Research & Development and Scientific Advisor to Raksha Mantri simultaneously.
  10. That Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) is having vision ” Make India prosperous by establishing world class science and technology base and provide our Defence Services decisive edge by equipping them with internationally competitive systems and solutions ” and Mission ” Design, develop and lead to production state-of-the-art sensors, weapon systems, platforms and allied equipment for our Defence Services , Provide technological solutions to the Services to optimise combat effectiveness and to promote well-being of the troops and Provide technological solutions to the Services to optimise combat effectiveness and to promote well-being of the troops”.
  11. That DRDO is having budget of Rs. 15283 crore for the FY 2014-2015 in Union Budget 2014 and this is fund is controlled by Secretary, Department of Defence R&D, DGR&D and SA to RM.
  12. That DRDO is having 52 establishments and approx. 30000 employees including 7500 Scientists. The Head of DRDO is holding three post simultaneously DGR&D, SA to RM and Secretary, DRD. He is having control over 30000 employees, 52 establishments and Rs. 15283 crore of public money.
  13. That DRDO is having seven technology based domain cluster with seven Director General(DG) and more than 20 Corporate Directorate headed by more than 8 Chief Controller Research & Development(CCR&D) . Most of the DG and CCR&D are on extension in service beyond 60 years. The copy of the Organisation Chart of DRDO is annexed as Annexure- A2 to this PIL.
  14. That statutory Recruitment & Promotion Rules for DRDO Scientists under Defence Research & Development Service (DRDS) cadre of DRDO are called as Defence Research & Development Service Rules 1979 (DRDS Rules 1979). All recruitment and promotions of scientist are made under these Rules. There is no provision of appointment on contract in recruitment methods  under DRDS Rules 1979.
  15. That Establishment Officer’s Division (EO Division) , DOPT, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions,  Government of India processes all proposals for senior appointments in the Government of India that require approval of the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet under the Government of India Transactions of Business Rules, 1961. These include Board level appointments in Public Sector Undertakings and appointments to the posts at the level of Joint Secretary. In addition, all appointments by promotion that require ACC approval are processed through the E.O. Division. For this purpose, the Establishment Officer functions as the Secretary to the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet.
  16. That  Appointments Committee of the Cabinet(ACC) approves  appointments to several top posts under the Government of India. The committee is composed of the Prime Minister of India (who is the Chairman), the Minister of Home Affairs and the Minister in-charge of the concerned Ministry. The Establishment Officer’s Division (EO Division) processes all proposals for senior appointments in the Government of India that require approval of the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet under the Government of India Transactions of Business Rules, 1961. The Appointments Committee of the Cabinet, reconstituted in June 2014. Now Prime Minister and Home Minister to constitute Appointments Committee on Cabinet and will no longer have ‘minister in-charge of the concerned ministry’ as member.
  17. That Shri Ajit Kumar Seth, IAS (DOB: 24 Nov 1951) appointed as Cabinet Secretary, Government of India by Appointment Committee of Cabinet(ACC) for two years with effect from 14.06.2011 to 13.06.2013. His tenure was further extended for one year with effect from 14.06.2013 to 13.06.2014. His tenure was again extended for 06 months with effect from 14.06.2014 to 13.12.2014. His tenure has been again extended for six month beyond 13 Dec 2014 by ACC.
  18. That Shri Bhanu Pratap Sharma, IAS was appointed as Establishment Officer & Additional Secretary, DOPT, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions by Appointment Committee of Cabinet(ACC) on 23.11.2011 and by order dated 03.11.2014 of ACC , he has been appointed as Special Secretary and Establishment Officer, DOPT.
  19. All the extensions in service beyond age of 60 years are made through DOPT, DPRC, Screening Committee headed by Cabinet Secretary and ACC headed by Hon’ble Prime Minister. ACC is constituted of three members- Hon’ble Prime Minister, Hon’ble Home Minister and Hon’ble Minister of concerned Ministry.
  20. That Shri Avinash Chander (DOB: 06.11.1950) joined DRDO in August 1972. He was appointed as Chief Controller Research & Development (Missiles & Strategic Systems) on 11 May 2011 and that time he was holding rank Distinguished Scientist in 75,500-80,000/- (HAG+ Scale)  with effect from 14.06.2006. His date of retirement was 30 November 2010 but Government gave extension in service to him for two years beyond  60 years and up to 62 years from 01 December 2010 to 30 November 2012. Government gave further extension of two years beyond 62 years and up to 64 years age from 01 Dec 2012 to 30 November 2014.
  21. That procedure to Grant of extension/re-employment to Central Government servants beyond the age of superannuation covered by DOPT OM 26012/6/2002-Estt. (A) dated 09 December 2002 , DOPT OM No. 26012/8/2011-Estt. (A) dated 16 May 2011 and DOPT OM No. 22/35/2011-E0 (SM.I1) dated 24 September 2014. Copies  of the DOPT OMs dated 09 December 2002 and dated 16 May 2011 is annexed as Annexure-A3 ,  Annexure-A4 and Annexure A5 to this PIL.
  22. That the for consideration of cases of extensions in service beyond age of 60 years for scientists in DRDO are covered by Office Memorandum of DOPT issued time to time. These OMs are OM No. 26012/15/2010-Estt(A-IV) dated 4th May 2011, OM No. 26012/7/2013/Estt.(A-IV) dated 26th June 2013 and OM No. 26012/7/2013-Estt(A-IV) dated 26th September 2014. All the proposals for extension in service are processed through DPRC constituted by these OMs of DOPT. Copies of OMs dated 4th May 2011, 26th June 2013 and 26th September 2014 are annexed as Annexure-A6  , Anexure-A7 and Annexure-A8 to this PIL.
  23. That the Screening Committee headed by Cabinet Secretary for considering the proposals for extensions beyond  62 years and up to 64 years of age is constituted by DOPT OM No. 26012/15/2010-Estt/A-IV dated 4th May 2011 and DOPT OM No. 26012/12/2013-Estt.(A) 13th June 2013.  Copies of DOPT OMs dated 4th May 2011 and 13th June 2013 are annexed as Annexure-A9 and Anexure-A10.
  24. That under the provisions of DOPT OMs at Annexure-A3, Anexure-A4 and Anexure-A5 and FR 56(d) for extension beyond 62 year and up to 64 year age two conditions should be fulfilled-(i) the Scientist should have international stature (ii) such extension should not  block promotion opportunities of others in the Department.
  25. That Bio-Data of Shri Avinash Chander, DS & CCR&D (MSS) is annexed as Annexure-A11 to this PIL. Bio-data of Sri Avinash Chander, DS & CCR&D(MSS) shows that he was not having International Stature in field of Science & Technology. Therefore DPRC headed by DGR&D, SA to RM and Secretary, DRD and Screening Committee headed by Cabinet Secretary illegally recommended the name of Shri Avinash Chander for extension from 62 to 64 year age in gross violation of FR 56(d) and DOPT OMs. The ACC approved the extension of Shri Avinash Chander based on recommendations of DPRC and Screening Committee and did not applied their mind to see the rule position and documents on record in file. Besides these DPRC, Screening Committee and ACC violated provisions of the FR 56(d) and second condition as Shri Avinash Chander was Distinguished Scientist from 14.06.2006 and his second extension blocked  the promotion opportunity of other senior Scientists having rank of Outstanding Scientists as vacancy of   Distinguished Scientist in DRDO is very limited 08-10 during the 2010-2012. Fundamental Rules are statutory rules and extension in violation of Fundamental Rules 56(d) was unconstitutional.
  26. That in any circumstances DRDO Scientists cannot get extension beyond 64 year age under the provisions of FR 56(d) and DOPT OMs on grant of extension in service.
  27. That Appointment Committee of Cabinet(ACC) headed by Prime Minister as Chairman, Home Minister and Defence Minister as members approved the  regular appointment and appointment on contract after retirement of Shri Avinash Chander as Secretary, Department of Defence Research & Development-cum-Director General, Defence Research and Development Organisation and Scientific Adviser to Raksha Mantri for a period of three years from the date of assumption of charge or until further orders, whichever is earlier by order 31 May 2013.   Copy of the order    I2/9/2013-EO (SM.I) , Secretariat of the Appointment Committee of Cabinet, DOPT dated 31 May 2013 is annexed as Annexure-A12 of this PIL.
  28. That according the appointment letter dated 31 May 2013 of Shri Avinash Chander as Secretary DRD -cum- DGR&D and Scientific Advisor to Raksha Mantri , ACC approved  that “The appointment of Shri Avinash Chander beyond his date of retirement i.e. 30.11.2014 would be on contract basis with the same terms and conditions as he would be entitled to Secretary (DRD) before the date of retirement”.
  29. That , the list of Scientists of DRDO considered for the post of Secretary (DRD) by ACC in May 2013 is enclosed as Annexure -A13 to this PIL.
  30. That Shri Avinash Chander retired on 30th November 2014. In this connection Press Release was issued by PIB, MOD on 28th November 2014 at 18:48 IST. Copy of Press Release of PIB , MOD dated 28  November 2014 is annexed as Annexure-A14 to this PIL. According to press release of PIB “The appointment of Dr. Avinash Chander beyond his date of retirement i.e. 30.11.2014 for 18 months would be on contract basis, with the same terms and conditions as he would be entitled to Secretary (DRD) before the date of retirement. His contractual term will end on 31 May 2016”.
  31. That DOPT issued two OMs No. AB.14017/34/2008-Estt. (RR) (Pt.) dated 17th June, 2013 and AB.14017/34/2008-Estt. (RR) (Pt.) dated 16th June, 2014 regarding need for contract appointment in the Ministry/Department. These two OMs of DOPT clarified that till date Government has not finalised the policy/rules for appointment on contract in SAG/HAG scale. Copy of OMs dated 17th June, 2013 and 16th June, 2014 is annexed as Annexure-A15 to this PIL.
  32. That in reply to Unstarred Question NO-2871 put by Sri E.M. Sudarsana Natchiappan, MP in Rajya Sabha on 06.09.2012 on Appointment of Secretaries on contract basis, it was informed by Hon’ble Shri V. Narayanasamy, Minister of State in the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions and Minister of State in the Prime Minister’s Office that “there is no policy formulation for appointing the Secretaries in Union Ministries and Departments on contract”. Copy of the reply dated 06.09.2012 is annexed as Annexure-A16 to this PIL.
  33. The Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), in its reply to Lok Sabha MP Asaduddin Owaisi, has stated that “Government servants are allowed to continue in service after 60 years in rare and exceptional cases.” It is relevant to mention here that the news was published on 28 May 2012 in Hindustan Times stating “Contractual appointment post-retirement not in rules” based on reply given by DOPT, Ministry of Personnel in 15th Lok Sabha. Copy of the News published in Hindustan Times dated 28 May 2012 is annexed as Annexure-A17.
  34. That several complaints against Shri Avinash Chander are pending before PMO and MOD and  according to rules without vigilance clearance any retired Government employee cannot be appointed on contract as Secretary cum DGR&D and   Scientific Advisor to Raksha Mantri and Head of the DRDO.
  35. That Shri Navin Prakash Gupta resident of Kanpur filed complaint to Hon’ble Prime Minister, PMO regarding “Cancellation of illegal appointment of Sri Avinash Chander, Director General Research & Development, Scientific Advisor to Raksha Mantri and Secretary, Department of Defence R&D by Appointment Committee of Cabinet , Govt. of India” dated 06 August 2014. Copy of the complaint is annexed as Annexure-A18 to this PIL. The said complainant has been disposed of by Group of Secretaries headed by Cabinet Secretary on 12.11.2014 and it was informed by CPIO, Cabinet Secretariat vide his letter dated 26 November 2014. Copy of the letter dated 26 November 2014 is annexed as Annexure-A19 to this PIL. The complainant has not been informed about  outcome/decision of Government on the complaint.
  36. That Shri Navin Prakash Gupta resident of Kanpur filed complaint to Hon’ble Prime Minister, PMO regarding “Doubtful Integrity, Criminal Misconduct, Breach of Trust & Nepotism by Shri Avinash Chander, Secretary, Department of Defence R&D   Ministry of Defence, Government of India” dated 13 November 2014. Copy of the complaint  dated 13 November 2014 is annexed as Annexure-A20 to this PIL. The complaint is still pending before the PMO.
  37. That the petitioner has filed complaint against Shri Avinash Chander to PMO on the subject “Shri Avinash Chander, SA to RM, DG DRDO, Secretary (DRD) patronizing organized corruption in procurement by Dr. A. K. Saxena, Director, DMSRDE, DRDO, Kanpur” dated 13 September 2014. Copy of the complaint dated 13 September 2014 is annexed as Annexure-A21 to this PIL
  38. That the petitioner has filed complaint against Shri Avinash Chander to PMO on the subject ” Example of Shri Avinash Chander’s feudalism in DRDO” dated 14 September 2014. Copy of the complaint dated 14 September  2014 is annexed as Annexure-A22 to this PIL.
  39. That the petitioner has filed complaint against Shri Avinash Chander to Central Vigilance Commissioner(CVC) on the subject “Recruitment of Shri Saroj Kumar Patel, Scientist ‘G’ and Appointment on post of Director, Directorate of Quality, Reliability &Safety (DQRS), DRDO HQ Complaint against Shri Avinash Chander, DG, DRDO, SA to RM, Secretary, DRD” dated 14 September 2014. Copy of the complaint dated 14 September 2014 is annexed as Annexure-A23 to this PIL.
  40. That petitioner has filed complaint against Shri Avinash Chander to Hon’ble Defence Minister on the subject “Shri Avinash Chander is not interested to take any action on DMSRDE corruption cases” dated 01 November 2014. Copy of the complaint dated 01 November 2014 is annexed as Annexure-A24 to this PIL.
  41. That petitioner has filed complaint against Shri Avinash Chander to PMO on the subject “Request for cancellation Post Retirement Contractual Appointment of Shri Avinash Chander as DG, DRDO to save the premier organization from the clutches of corrupt and incompetents officials” dated 26 November 2014. Copy of the complaint dated 26 November 2014 is annexed as Annexure-A25 to this PIL.
  42. That Government is having view that the extensions in service  beyond age of retirement should not be granted to scientists in DRDO as well as other S&T Organisation/Departments. This view of Government has come in media. Specially an article published in issue of 13 October 2014 of India Today. Copy of the article “DRDO has become ageing body with top scientists on extension” is annexed as Annexure-A26 to this PIL.
  43. That despite being so many complaints pending against Shri Avinash Chander, the Government continued his appointment on contract as Secretary, Department of Defence Research & Development-cum-Director General, Defence Research and Development Organisation and Scientific Adviser to Raksha Mantri and he is working on this post on contract with full administrative and financial powers.
  44. That in view of the facts and circumstances stated above, it is expedient in the interest of justice that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent no. 1 & 2  to ensure the cancellation of appointment on contract of on contract as Secretary, Department of Defence Research & Development-cum-Director General, Defence Research and Development Organisation and Scientific Adviser to Raksha Mantri and issue order to keep away from post of Secretary, DRD cum DGR&D and SA to RM  during the pendency of the present Writ Petition (PIL).
  45. That the Petitioner has no other efficacious alternative remedy except to approach this Hon’ble Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
  46. That the Petitioner is filing the instant (PIL) writ petition inter-alia on the following among other grounds:-

DRDO Greets New Defence Minister With Successful LRSAM Test

By Hemant Kumar Rout | ENS Published: 10th November 2014 -The Indian Express

BALASORE: Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) on Monday greeted new Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar with the successful test firing of new generation state-of-the-art long range surface-to-air missile (LRSAM) Barak-8.

Barak_8
A model of Barak-8 missile | EPS

Defence sources said the missile, developed jointly by the DRDO and Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), was test launched from the weapon test range in the Negev desert of Israel at about 10.20 am as per Indian time.
A DRDO release stated that the missile successfully intercepted a manoeuvring air-breathing target mimicking an attacking combat aircraft. The test also validated all the elements related to the naval and land-based variants of the missile including the phased array radar, battle management system, communications and the interceptor.

“After detecting the incoming aerial target through the system’s radar, the weapon system calculated the optimal interception point, launched the missile into its operational trajectory that acquired the target and successfully intercepted it. All the weapon system’s components met mission parameters successfully”, the release stated.

Barak-8 is an Indo-Israeli surface-to-air missile (SAM), designed to defend against aircraft, anti-ship missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). In January 2007, India and Israel had signed a US$330 million deal to co-develop an all new generation of the Barak SAM, which has been named as Barak-8.

The missile has a length of about 4.5 meters, a diameter of 0.54 meters, wingspan of 0.94 meters and weighs around 275 kg including a 60 kg warhead which detonates at proximity. The missile has maximum speed of Mach 2 with an operational range of 75 km to 100 km. It possesses high degrees of maneuverability at target interception range.

A second motor is fired during the terminal phase, at which stage the active radar seeker is activated to home in on to the enemy track. Barak-8 has been designed to counter a wide variety of air-borne threats, such as anti-ship missiles, aircraft, UAVs and drones as well as supersonic cruise missiles, the sources added.

The test was carried out in the presence of DRDO scientists and officials of the Indian Armed Forces. The system is developed for both Israel defence forces and Indian armed forces. Scientific Advisor to Defence Minister and DRDO Chief Avinash Chander and President of IAI Joseph Weiss witnessed the test along with top officials of Israel defence forces.

According to IAI, Barak-8 employs a state-of-the-art phased array multi-mission radar, two-way data link and flexible command and control system. Congratulating scientists, Chander termed the event as a milestone in cooperation between the two countries in developing advanced weapon systems.
9 Comments

devasis • 24 days ago
Parrikar the nation wants some action from you. Let us make our arms ourselves.
The 80,000 crores we spend on importing arms could have been spent on health and education.

Davanand Atomic Singh • a month ago
All this weaponry and yet still an army jawan and a civilian is dead. Are we using the weaponry for the right reasons? Here the minister is greeted with the launch whilst there are families crying for their loved ones. Can we correct ourselves and use the equipment for the right reasons and not shelve them for no purpose. These weapons have to be exploited or the enemy will just take control of our country, through intelligence or actions.

ron ban • a month ago
Interesting thing is that India has co developed with Russia a ship killing missile named Brahmos …………… and with Israel has co developed a missile named Barak 8 to protect ships from Brahmos type missiles.

Mohit • a month ago
Do some more test and install this system in our new frigates and aircraft carrier “Vikramaditya”. They have been deployed without missile defense system.

NSR • a month ago
Since India paid for the development of LRSAM and MRSAM, does it get the Intellectual Property completely, or share with Israel, or no IP at all?
How did Israel allowed to sell Barak-8 to other foreign countries? Does India also has right to sell it too if it wishes…

Mohit NSR • 25 days ago
India have contributed by developing rocket motor and actuation system for Barak-8 missile. IAI have worked on target seeker and radar. DRDO should have acquired technology from Israeli.  This missile can be sold to other nation only when allowed by both India and Israel.
It is good that other nation are getting interested in acquiring this system as it will help in making money out of this and developing more advanced weaponry. 2) In the long term , India can sell off other missile system to these country as they have more confidence on Indian built systems 3) selling to friendly nation can help us in long term.

nicky NSR • a month ago
its a co-developed system so both have equal right over lrsam . yes India can export it any country but both India and Israel must agree first .if for example India wants to sell lrsam to Brazil but Israel not interested then the deal cannot go through .

NSR nicky • 25 days ago
I read somewhere that Israel is not going to transfer full technology of seeker and radar to us even though they used our money to develop it…I heard that they just supplied blueprints and India had trouble producing seeker from the supplied data…
After successful flight, even IAI president acknowledged that without India’s money it would have remained a design project only…
So I hope they do really transfer all technology and do more joint R&D, design, and manufacturing projects…

Request for cancellation Post Retirement Contractual Appointment of Sh Avinash Chander as DG, DRDO to save the premier organization from the clutches of corrupt and incompetents officials

To                                                                                  26th November 2014
Hon’ble Shri Narendra Modi,
Prime Minister,
PMO, South Block,
New Delhi-110011

SUBJECT:   Request for cancellation Post Retirement Contractual Appointment of Sh Avinash Chander as DG, DRDO to save the premier organization from the clutches of corrupt and incompetents officials.  

Sir,

Shri Avinash Chander, DG, DRDO, SA to RM and Secretary, DRD is retiring on 28 November 2014 at age of 64 after getting two unconstitutional & unrequired extensions of two-two years.

As a matter of fact and requirement under FR & SR, a retired Government servant cannot be appointed as Head of the Organisation with all administrative and financial powers after his retirement on contract. There is provision of appointing retired Government servant on need basis following with due prescribed procedure under rules keeping in view of transparency and open opportunity for all eligible persons.

DRDO is very prestigious organisation  for Defence related indigenous R&D with budget of Rs. 15283 crore for FY 2014-2015 but what is fate of 90% + projects of DRDO, Government, media and public knows very well.

DRDO is better known as “Delay Research & Derailed Organisation” and you are committed to revamp DRDO. The whole nation especially the scientific community appreciated your steps and measures taken for DRDO in present and planned for future.

Appointment of Hon’ble Manohar Parrikar, an eminent engineer from IIT as Defence Minister by you was very much appreciated by nation, media and scientific community.

That will definitely help overhauling and revamping of DRDO by eradication of corruption from DRDO, maintain accountability and transparency in DRDO.

The integrity and moral fibre are two main attributes of Government servant but unfortunately Shri Avinash Chander could not maintain these two in his tenure from 31st May 2013 to 28 Nov 2014 as DG, DRDO, SA to RM and Secretary, DRD which is very much evident from the various complaints pending against him before PMO and Cabinet Secretariat.

In his tenure, number of court cases increases in many fold,  Sh Chander set example to promoting and recruiting incompetents (Ms Tesy Thomas promotion to Sc H and her husband CMDR S K Patel‘s appointment as Sc G and after few days he was made Director, QRS). This act follows discontentment among the senior scientists of DRDO.

The number of SC/ST and minorities complaints increased.

Not able to manage media instead of two crores budget for Public Interface.

There was not a single mentionable product/technology delivered instead Sh Chander tried to show the old products again like EDK the MoU was already signed by DRDO in 2012, Chander spends crores of rupees for that in US visit for unacceptable technology, no evidence are of reorganizations of said product internationally because there are  numerous advance technologies are available.

Secondly, the Bio digester, DRDO three times earlier dedicated this to nation and interestingly it is not as said by DRDO spin off technology it is mere only gobar gas plant in the name of innovation of DRDO the said microbes are already found in cow dunk.  One senior scientist from DRDO itself already exposes this propaganda of DRDO to CVC

The contractual appointment after retirement has also been challenged by some citizens before Government and media also highlighted the pro & cons of this matter.

Therefore, it is requested to Hon’ble Sir to cancel the post retirement contractual appointment of Shri Avinash Chander, DG, DRDO, SA to RM and Secretary, DRD before 30th November, the date of his retirement and not continue him further in DRDO in interest of nation and scientists of DRDO.

Regards
Prabhu Dandriyal
www.corruptionindrdo.com
 
Copy to:
Hon’ble Sh ManoharParrikar
Defence Minister
Room No -104, Min. of Defence
South Block
New Deli-110011

Prof. (Dr.) M.P. Kaushik Sc. `H’ Director, DRDE’s extension desire

 
माननीय श्रीनरेंद्र मोदी जी                                                                  दिनाक 28 अक्टूबर  2014
प्रधानमंत्री
कक्षसंख्या  152 पीएमओ
साउथ ब्लाक  नईदिल्ली -110011

 

विषय : 60 साल उपरांत सेवा विस्तार के नियम का विभिन्न संस्थानों द्वारा अयोग्य, अक्षम व्यक्तियों की संस्तुति कर दुरूपयोग करने के सन्दर्भ में

माननीय श्री प्रधानमंत्री जी  आपने  इस महत्वपूर्ण विषय में ध्यान देकर इस दुरूपयोग रोकने के लिए आदेश भी दिए परन्तु यह बड़े खेद का विषय है कि कार्मिक विभाग आपके आदेशो को समुचित प्रभाव  से  कार्यान्वित करने में ढीलम ढाल कर रहे।

डीआरडीओ के श्री अविनाश चन्दर, वैज्ञानिक सलाहकार द्वारा अयोग्य, अक्षम व्यक्तियों की संस्तुति करना लगातार जारी है।  डी आर डी ई, ग्वालियर के निदेशक महोदय प्रोफ डा एम पी कौशिक जोकि इस 31 अक्टूबर 2014 को रिटायर हो रहे हैं वह अभी दिल्ली में श्री अविनाश चन्दर के चरण वंदना में लगे है कि किसी भी तरह उनको सेवा विस्तार दिला दे या फिर कोई चेयर, फेलोशिप, कॉन्ट्रैक्ट या कुछ भी दिला दो।

बदले में वो क्या कर सकते है उसकी एक झलक देखिये, एन बी सी वारफेयर के हेड होने के नाते  डा एम पी कौशिक ने एक विदेशी  यंत्र  (ICAD Chempro100i Make: Environics) जोकि विषाक्त केमिकलो का तुरंत  प्रभाव से पता लगा लेता था का आयात करा और उसकी गुणवत्ता को देख कर सेना ने  999 संख्या में 100 करोड़ रुपये की  इस यंत्र की खरीद जोकि  सामान्य  से दुगनी से ज्यादा कीमत थी।  यंत्र की सेना में विदेश से आप्पूर्ति  के बाद पता चला है की यह यंत्र हमारे देश की क्लाइमेट कंडीशन के लिए उपयुक्त नहीं है और काम नहीं कर रहा।

इस यंत्र की बड़ी इतनी संख्या में बड़ी हुई कीमतों में खरीददारी से किसको फायदा मिला और कहां कहां तक बटा यह तो सिर्फ डा एम पी कौशिक ही बता सकते है।

ऐसे लोगो की सेवा विस्तार के लिए संतुस्ती आना ही एक गंभीर बात है।  इस से संस्तुति करने वालो की मंशा व् नियत पर भी सवाल उठता है।

आपकी निरक्षण व् कार्यवाही के लिए कुछ तथ्य सलग्न है।

आशा है की इन तथ्यों की सपूर्ण जाँच करवा कर देश के बहुमूल्य पैसो का दोहन करने वालो के खिलाफ उचित कार्यवाही का जल्द से जल्द जाँच का आदेश देंगे।

 

धन्यवाद
 
प्रभुडंडरियाल
21-सुंदरवालारायपुरदेहरादून
फ़ोन  0135- 2787750, मोबाइल – 9411114879,
e-मेल  id prabhudoon@gmail.com  वेबसाइट  www.corruptionindrdo.com

 

Enclosed details: Purchase background of ICAD Chempro 100i,, Make: Environics

Budgetary Price approximately $9,500 

Purchase Price – Rs 100000/- each in bulk purchase                                                (more than $ 16000/each)

Army has purchased instrument ICAD Chempro 100i (Qty: 999 No’s, Make: Environics) against contract nos B/28704/NBC-4C/ICAD/GS/WE-6 Dated 23 Jun 2009 and B/28704/NBC-4C/Option/ICAD/GS/WE-6 dated 26 Mar 2010 for approximately 100 Crore (INR). This instrument detects the chemical warfare agents and is of utmost importance for the defence services. Having cleared the payment after the delivery, it was found that all these instruments failed to perform as per the specification and have technical problems. It is evident from the letter enclosed that performance related issues were raised in Nov 2012 and since then no action has been taken. Few officials are trying to cover up the issue by changing the specification instead of taking 100 Crore back.

As per the information gathered from the sources, these instruments were first purchased by   M P Kaushik from DRDE Gwalior (A DRDO Laboratory and Nodal Agency in Chemical Warfare). Satisfactory working certificate were given to the company and payment was cleared. Later Army gave the contract. It seems that with the help of M P Kaushik few official of army has executed this act.

Environics's reply regarding non function of Chempro100i
Environics’s reply regarding non function of Chempro100i

 

Environics's reply regarding non function of Chempro 100i
Environics’s reply regarding non function of Chempro 100i

chempPro 100 hand held chemical detector

Chemical Warfare Agents result from Chem Pro 110
Technology Evaluation Report Environics USA Inc. ChemPro 100 Hand-Held Chemical Detector By- Tricia Derringer, Thomas Kelly, Dale Folsom, Robert Krile, and Zachary Willenberg, Battelle, 505 King Avenue, Columbus, OH 43201  and Eric Koglin Task Order Project Officer National Homeland Security Research Center Office of Research and Development U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 944 East Harmon Ave. Las Vegas, NV 89119

mp

 

RTI-DOPT- DRDO Extension Buisness

To                                                                                                               26th September 2014
Sh Subandhu Basu,
US (SM-I), CPIO,
Room no. 23, North Block,
New Delhi -110001

 

Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in respect of OFFICE MEMORANDUM  F.No.22/35/2011-EO (SM.II) 24th September, 2014 Sub: Grant of extension/re-employment to Central Government servants beyond the age of superannuation.  In Para 1 – The ACC has observed that in some of the cases, the Departments are not taking timely action to reconstitute the Departmental Peer Review Committee (DPRC) and are unilaterally extending the service of the officers beyond the age of superannuation without first obtaining approval of the ACC.

  1. Provide the name of officials and name of their respective departments who were get extension in service beyond superannuation for two years without first obtaining approval of the ACC from January 2011 to till date as mentioned in above OM
  2.  Provide the name of officials and name of their respective departments who were get extension in service after 62 to 64 years without first obtaining approval of the ACC from January 2011 to till date as mentioned in above OM.
  3. Provide the total number of DRDO officials granted extension for two years 60 to 62 years from January 2010 to till date.
  4.  Provide the total number of DRDO officials granted extension for two years 62 to 64 years from January 2010 to till date.

 

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

Registration Number     DOP&T/R/2014/63933

Former DRDO chief sentenced to 3 weeks in jail

PTI Chennai, September 26, 2014 Hindustan Times

Former DRDO chief Dr VK Saraswat and another senior scientist were on Thursday sentenced to three weeks simple imprisonment by Madras High Court for committing contempt of court by disobeying its April 2009 order related to re-employment of a clerk in a school run by a wing of the organisation.

Taking a serious view of the non-implementation of its order, a division bench comprising Justice S Rajeswaran and Justice P N Prakash awarded three weeks simple imprisonment to Saraswat and Director of Defence Metallurgical Research Laboratory, Dr G Malakondaiah and directed them to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000 each personally.

The court was allowing a contempt of court petition by S Joseph Raj, who was an employee of the school run by Combat Vehicles Research & Development Establishment (CVRDE) at suburban Avadi here. The bench directed the Government to take appropriate departmental action against them for the “reckless, negligence and willful disobedience of the order of the Court”.

The court held Saraswat, a Padmabhushan awardee and former Scientific Advisor to the Defence Minister and Director General of Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), guilty of Civil Contempt under the contempt of courts Act, 1971. When CVRDE closed the school, he and other employees approached the Central Administrative Tribunal challenging it.

Even after several rounds of litigations before CAT and the High Court and Supreme Court, he was made to suffer, it noted. On April 30, 2009, the High Court directed the two officials to appoint Joseph Jaj as Senior Technical Assistant (Library Science) within a period of two months.

However, the officials on April 13, 2012, passed an order stating that Joseph Raj was not eligible to be considered as Senior Technical Assitant (Library Science) and that he was not a government servant, prompting him to file the present contempt petition.

“We find the above officers were doing everything within their powers to deny a just benefit to Joseph Raj. We are aware that the officers are occupying very high position in the government, but ensconced in a pedestal, their vision became blurred when it came to the travails of an ordinary employee who was suddenly thrown out of employment, for no fault of his,” the judges said.

It said that even during the contempt proceedings, there was no tinge of remorse or an attempt to correct the mistake by the two officials. “Therefore, we propose to impose punishment of sentence of imprisonment on the above officials for their willful disobedience of this court order,” it held.

The court also warned the above officials that it was not an end of the matter and directed them to comply with the order forthwith in the matter of appointment.

Former DRDO chief sentenced to 3 weeks imprisonment in contempt case

India Today.in New Delhi, September 25, 2014

Former DRDO chief V K Saraswat and another senior scientist were on Thursday sentenced to three weeks simple imprisonment by Madras High Court for contempt of court. They had disobeyed its April 2009 order related to re-employment of a clerk in a school run by a wing of the organisation.

Taking a serious view of the non-implementation of its order, a division bench comprising Justice S Rajeswaran and Justice P N Prakash awarded three weeks simple imprisonment to Saraswat and Director of Defence Metallurgical Research Laboratory, G Malakondaiah and directed them to pay a fine of Rs.2,000 each personally, PTI reported.

The court was allowing a contempt of court petition by S Joseph Raj, who was an employee of the school run by Combat Vehicles Research & Development Establishment (CVRDE) at suburban Avadi here.

The bench directed the Government to take appropriate departmental action against them for the “reckless, negligence and willful disobedience of the order of the Court”.

The court held Saraswat, a Padmabhushan awardee and former Scientific Advisor to the Defence Minister and Director General of Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), guilty of Civil Contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

When CVRDE closed the school, he and other employees approached the Central Administrative Tribunal challenging it.

Even after several rounds of litigations before CAT and the High Court and Supreme Court, he was made to suffer, it noted.

On April 30, 2009, the High Court directed the two officials to appoint Joseph Jaj as Senior Technical Assistant (Library Science) within a period of two months.

However, the officials on April 13, 2012, passed an order stating that Joseph Raj was not eligible to be considered as Senior Technical Assistant (Library Science) and that he was not a government servant, prompting him to file the present contempt petition.

“We find the above officers were doing everything within their powers to deny a just benefit to Joseph Raj. We are aware that the officers are occupying very high position in the government, but ensconced in a pedestal, their vision became blurred when it came to the travails of an ordinary employee who was suddenly thrown out of employment, for no fault of his,” the judges said.

It said that even during the contempt proceedings, there was no tinge of remorse or an attempt to correct the mistake by the two officials.

“Therefore, we propose to impose punishment of sentence of imprisonment on the above officials for their willful disobedience of this court order,” it held.

The court also warned the above officials that it was not an end of the matter and directed them to comply with the order forthwith in the matter of appointment.