By Manu Pubby, ET Bureau Aug 26, 2020 Synopis To be led by Prof P Ramagopal Rao, Director IIT Delhi, the select panel will delve deep into the nature of work being carried out by each lab under the organisation and will present a report to redefine the charter of work being carried out and minimize technology overlaps. NEW DELHI: The Defence Research and Defence Organisation (DRDO) is going for a deep overhaul of its laboratories and has set up an expert panel to review their charter of duties to prepare the armed forces for futuristic battlefields.
To be led by Prof P Ramagopal Rao, Director IIT Delhi, the select panel will delve deep into the nature of work being carried out by each lab under the organisation and will present a report to redefine the charter of work being carried out and minimize technology overlaps.
Interestingly, the panel also includes representation from the armed forces, with Deputy Chief of Air Staff Air Marshal Sandeep Singh as a member. Others include ISRO Director S Somnath and two representatives from within the DRDO. The committee is to present a roadmap within 45 days with the specific directive to “redefine the charter of duties of labs on the current and futuristic battlefield scenario; minimise the overlay of technologies amongst the labs.”
The study could pave the way for a reorganisation of the organisation that has a network of 52 labs across the country engaged in a variety of projects – from nuclear missiles to development of fighters and UAVs, food products for soldiers, data analytics and laser technology.
The last major overhaul of the organisation took place after the Rama Rao Committee report of 2008 that had suggested that DRDO be reorganised into clusters of labs based on the role they were tasked with. Seven clusters were set up like missiles, armaments, aeronautical systems and life sciences.
The Rama Rao Committee had recommended the setting up of a Defence Technology Commission, a younger age profile for scientists, more involvement of the organization in defence procurements, more foreign collaborations, a dedicated research board, restructuring of labs and a commercial arm of the research body. It had also recommended that DRDO concentrate efforts in 8-10 critical areas suiting its existing resources and that 11 labs related to life sciences be transferred out of DRDO to other departments.
Dear Dr. G. Satheesh Reddy Congratulations for taking charge of Chairman DRDO, after long chase and waiting of one year three months finally you achieve your goal.
Now the time has come to see that what a young DRDO chief can deliver to nation.
some observations will help you to reshape the pathetic condition of DRDO
Whether DRDO: Ailing organisation in ICU needs Surgical Curtailment
1. One of the negligent aspect of DRDO is maltreatment of the valuable and scientific human resource. They are treated worse than a clerk, transferring non compliant officers, favouring own people for making good of office power. No link to promotions, awards and transfers to the performance of the scientists.
2. More pathetic is mishandling of finance, get funds, award tenders to favored vendor, either national or international, get cuts to fatten benami bank accounts.
3. Poorly specified technical requirements leading to manipulation during placing supply orders.
4. Transferring anyone not obliging for corruption, stopping their promotions and threatening them with dire consequences.
5. Forming a coterie and running the organisation as a family entity with vested interests further own progress rather than that of organisation.
6. No senior scientist including DGs, produce any worth technical paper having original research, because they don’t have time for R&D, since busy with producing fabricated data and bogus claims on scientific achievements.
7. Finally, DRDO ends up with a product that is obsolete, sub optimal and non- performing, handed over to armed forces forcefully. These inventories are a burden to the armed forces and finally junked without waiting for the final product.
8. Further, there’s a construction wing furiously doing research on arboriculture, estate maintenance and construction of quarters etc.
9. Reshape this, about a dozen of labs like DEBEL, DFRL, DIBER, SASE, DIPAS, INMAS etc so called life sciences units of DRDO doing all sorts of non core activities and wasting funds and manpower.
10. DRDO having lost focus, breeding corruption and engaged in non scientific activities, takes huge funds and does whatever a head of the establishment fancies. No questions asked.
11. The organization has been on this path and its scientist are molded to work in this path and thought process
In nutshell, DRDO has forgotten raison d’être, namely, to serve and support the services. It, in present form and function, is not fit to continue. It is anachronism with the international defence R&D. It needs Surgical Curtailment that provides professional Human Resource management and corruption free financial handling. Let professional and trained civil servants handle administration while the users decide the areas under which DRDO has to focus, omit trivial projects and concentrate on the core defence R&D.
Please take your decision is in right direction for both DRDO as well for the country’s military future.
First and foremost is DRDO has chosen path of Reverse Engineering during 80s to quickly develop some products for emergency requirements of those turbulent periods be it IMDP or any thing
This mindset only encouraged nepotism in the organization… And made 80s 90s era scientists turned current bosses become intolerant to new generation and out of box thinking in the organization
Scientist of DRDO managing all aspects of the organization likes HR, Operations, Finance, and Materials etc… But never bothered to train themselves in these fields
Currently without realizing that Reverse Engineering can only cater the Hand to Mouth needs which can never bring competitive edge in the current scenario…. People are still working with the same mindset
Incompetent Scientists as Directors without leadership abilities are ruining the young talent of the organization
and at last, hope you will fulfill your commitment, which you gave to a officer in Jolly Grant Airport, your act will differentiate that you are not egoist, low mindset, running after construction, favoring nepotism, coterie man like your most of predecessor DRDO chiefs, they spend their valuable time in these areas.
with lots hope and best wishes for your shiny Reddy tenure
www.corruptionindrdo.com ( working for clean DRDO)
Abhinandan Mishra, Sunday Guardian: August 18, 2018
‘Selecting a new DRDO chief has become like walking on a landmine’.
The post of the chief of Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) has been vacant for nearly three months now, courtesy the apparent pressure tactics being employed by various quarters—both from inside the government and outside it. A few posts had fallen vacant in the last week of May after the incumbent DRDO chief Selvin Christopher retired following a three-year long tenure which included a year long extension. The post of SA to RM (Scientific Advisor to Raksha Mantri), which was held by G. Satheesh Reddy for three years, including a year-long extension till 4 June 2018, is vacant too. DRDO chairman is also the Secretary of Defence, Research and Development.
Since the retirement of Christopher, Sanjay Mitra, a 1982 batch IAS of West Bengal cadre, is the Defence Secretary, and he is also holding the additional charge of the post of Secretary, Department of Defence Research & Development and Chairman, DRDO for a period of three months, beginning 29 May.
Official sources said that this was for the first time that the DRDO was staying headless for this long. They attributed this situation to various stakeholders who are involved in the functioning of the organisation. The DRDO has an annual budget of Rs 20,000 crore; it spends the same on the upkeep of over 50 laboratories across India.
“The post of the DRDO chief is a very coveted one and apart from merit, other factors like political interference, regional interference, import lobby and foreign vendors play a crucial role in the whole exercise. The government is not giving a very good message by displaying indecisiveness. Ideally, the next chief should have been identified and notified even before the term of the incumbent ended,” a former top official who worked with the organisation for more than three decades, said.
According to officials, selecting a new DRDO chief had become like walking on a landmine in recent times. “So many names are floating in the media; many of them are being planted by their adversaries, many by the claimants themselves. There is not a single name whose candidature will not generate controversy unlike at the time of appointment of Abdul Kalam or V.K. Aatre or V.S. Arunachalam, all of whom were well-known scientists. Earlier, the DRDO was headed by scientists who were really reputed, but now the situation has changed,” a scientist, posted with one of the DRDO laboratories, said.
Sources said that the government had come close to appointing a new chief when Selvin Christopher’s term was about to end, but at the very last moment, there was a “negative intelligence report” on the one who had been shortlisted and the whole process was abandoned.
“Prime Minister Narendra Modi had repeatedly expressed his concerns and apprehensions about the working of the DRDO. However, these concerns cannot be taken care of if the DRDO chief is appointed not because of merit, but due to his proximity to a particular minister or to a region,” the official said. In a not-so-covert hint that the organisation could be externally influenced, V.K. Aatre, who succeeded Kalam as DRDO chief, had once said that there were three non-state actors that influenced the working of DRDO: foreign vendors, mass media and the import lobby.
“If one traces back the history of the DRDO, one would come across names like Dr V.S. Arunachalam who had absolute freedom to walk into the office of successive PMs. He was close to Indira Gandhi and was able to secure a lot of money and autonomy for the organisation. Before him, we had people like Dr Daulat Singh Kothari, Professor S. Bhagavantam, Dr B.D. Nagchaudhuri, Prof M.G.K. Menon and Dr Raja Ramanna, who were scientists of international repute and were known for their work across the globe. Now it is not the same,” a senior official of the organisation said.
According to officials, the 2015 bifurcation of the post of the DRDO Chairman, Secretary of Defence, R&D and the SA to RM, which were earlier headed by the same individual, had led to two competing power centers within the organisation.
“This should not have been done as this has affected the value of the chair of the DRDO chief. Do you expect the SA to RM to give importance to the DRDO chief? Now every proposal that is brought by the DRDO is vetted by the SA to RM. There was a lot of friction between Selvin and Reddy because both of them thought they were more senior to the other,” an official of the organisation explained.
Former officials recalled how someone like Kalam, decorated with the , led the DRDO in the past. “He was the brain behind Pokhran-II; he was someone who stood shoulder to shoulder with the late Atal Bihari Vajpayee, a stalwart Prime Minister. We are missing a man like him. He needed no recommendation or political approach to become the chief of DRDO. People like Kalam had assumed a huge stature much before they had joined the DRDO,” an officer recalled.
Christopher was in May last year given a one-year extension. His extended term ended today.
NEW DELHI: The Defence Research And Development Organisation (DRDO) could stay headless for as many as three months with the government failing to find a replacement for incumbent Selvin Christopher who retired on Monday. Efforts till late to grant him another extension in service could have delayed the appointment of a successor, with a search committee looking at probable names to recommend to the cabinet appointments committee.
Defence Secretary Sanjay Mitra will hold additional charge of the organisation till the government approves a scientist to take over the top position, an official notification said.
The past few weeks has seen jostling for the post. DRDO has an annual budget of `17,861 crore. Outgoing chief Christopher who was already on a year’s extension of service beyond the prescribed age but had been hoping for yet another extension.
This search committee list is expected to include the three senior most scientists of DRDO, besides the first woman to have made it to the post of director-general in the organisation. Sources said that those in the fray include missile scientists G Satheesh Reddy, the scientific advisor to the defence minister and the head of the Brahmos missile project, Sudhir Mishra.
While Mishra and Reddy come from the missile scientist community that has traditionally ‘ruled’ DRDO, also in contention is Pravin K Mehta, who heads the Armament cluster of the research organisation from Pune. A surprise entrant to the selection shortlist could also be DG Jillelamudi Manjula who heads the Electronics & Communication Systems vertical at DRDO.
As reported by ET, several top level appointments are pending at the defence ministry. The crucial posting to Northern Army Commander is still to be announced
By Pradip R Sagar May 02, 2018 18:29 IST – THE WEEK
DRDO chief S. Christopher (left) with Arun Jaitley, during his brief tenure as defence minister in 2017 | Facebook account of DRDO
With the tenure of S. Christopher, current chief of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), coming to an end later this month, the race for the top post in the country’s premier defence research organisation has begun. Christopher, who was given a one-year extension at the last moment in May 2017, though, is also eyeing another extension. But whether he will be second time lucky is unclear.
Hectic parleys have begun for the coveted post. The key players who are in the race to lead the DRDO include Sudhir Mishra, director general of BrahMos missile system division, and G. Satheesh Reddy, who is presently serving as director general (Missiles & Strategic Systems) and scientific advisor to the defence minister. Besides Mishra and Reddy, P.K. Mehta, who is currently heading the office of the director general of armament and combat engineering systems, is considered to be in the race to head DRDO, which has an annual budget of nearly Rs 20,000 crore.
According to sources in South Block, Reddy is the senior-most scientist in the organisation after Christopher. His name figured prominently last year also, but Christopher managed to get an extension at the last minute, meaning Reddy would need to wait for a year. Former defence minister Manohar Parrikar had bifurcated the post of DRDO chief and scientific advisor to the defence minister, which earlier used to be occupied by one person. Christopher is completing his tenure on May 29.
Mishra, head of BrahMos missile system division—a joint venture between India and Russia— is also among candidates vying for the top post in DRDO.
Mehta, who is heading the Pune-based cluster of armament and combat engineering systems, can be a dark horse in the race due to his proximity with top BJP leaders, sources claimed.
Christopher, who took over as the head of DRDO in May 2015, did his best to impress Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman by showcasing the work done under his leadership towards self-reliance in the recently concluded DefExpo in Chennai. A special pavilion under the ‘Make in India’ theme was inaugurated by Modi, in which all major equipment designed and developed by DRDO were showcased. Last year, Christopher had directed all the labs to remove his photographs, just two weeks before he was to retire. But only at the last minute, he was given extension for a year by the government.
DRDO has often been criticised for delayed projects, as most of its ventures, ranging from the Tejas light combat aircraft to long-range surface-to-air missile systems, have been repeatedly missing deadlines, with huge cost overruns. In the absence of self-reliance in defence, the Indian armed forces continue to be heavily dependent on imports. India continues to top the list of global importers of military hardware, with over 70 per cent of armed forces’ requirements being met by foreign firms. Prime Minister Narendra Modi in his first interaction with DRDO scientists in 2014 had sent a stern message to the defence research agency against their ‘chalta hai’ attitude.
Abhinandan Mishra April 8, 2018, Sunday Guardian With the tenure of the chief of Defence Research and Development Organization Christopher (DRDO) ending next month, the officers eyeing his post have started meeting bureaucrats and politicians to push their candidature.
Even Christopher, who was given a one-year extension on 29 May last year, is interested in another tenure with the premier defence organisation and is banking on Defence Expo 2018, the largest land, naval and internal homeland security systems exhibition in the Asia-Pacific region, which will be held in Chennai from 11 to 14 April.
The defence expo, which will be inaugurated by Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, will also see the presence of Prime Minister Narendra Modi on 12 April.
Sources said it is during this event that Christopher intends to showcase the “impressive work” done by DRDO under his leadership, ever since he took over as the chief of the organisation in May 2015, to give a message to the PM that he deserves another extension.
The other officers who are fighting it out to lead the DRDO, which has an annual budget of close to Rs 17,900 crore, include P.K. Mehta, who is presently Director General for armament and combat engineering system in the organization; Dr Sudhir Mishra, who is the Director General of BrahMos missile system division of the DRDO; and G. Satheesh Reddy who is presently serving as Director General (Missiles & Strategic Systems) and Scientific Adviser to the Defence Minister.
Mehta, according to sources, is being backed by a very powerful leader from a western state, while Mishra is getting the support of some members of Niti Aayog.
Reddy’s appointment, according to sources, was almost finalised last year.
Last year, Christopher, who was given an extension at the last moment, had directed all the labs to remove his photographs from the lab, just two weeks before he was to retire.
Christopher in an internal communication had stated that “Old colonial practice followed by the Services, to display prominently, photos of their Chiefs and Commanders, is followed inadvertently by some of the labs. This practice is also not required. I request all DRDO establishments to display the photos of the President and Prime Minister of India only, and not the Chairman of DRDO. This may please be implemented at the earliest and not later than 15 May 2017”. He had stated that he was among the first few officials in the MoD who never used a red beacon, much before PM’s recent directive came. Sources within the organisation said that all the four people who were in the fray, had an exceptional profile.
By Srinand Jha The Economics Times, Nov 23, 2017 A new kind of toilet using bacteria to break down human excreta has been deployed in Indian trains over four years to 2017, at a cost of Rs 1,305 crore, but this toilet is no better than a septic tank, the Indian Institute of Technology-Madras (IIT-M) has concluded after a two-year long study.
As many as 93,537 “bio-digesters” — as the toilets are called –have been installed in mainline express and mail trains by the Indian Railways. These are small-scale sewage-treatment systems beneath the toilet seat: Bacteria in a compost chamber digests human excreta, leaving behind water and methane. Only the water, disinfected later, is let out on the tracks.
However, sanitation experts and various studies — including those commissioned by the railways — have pointed out that most of the new “” are ineffective or ill maintained and the water discharged is no better than raw sewage.
“Our tests have found that the organic matter (human waste) collecting in the bio-digesters do not undergo any kind of treatment,” IIT professor Ligy Philip, who headed the latest study, told IndiaSpend. “Like in the septic tanks, these bio-digesters accumulate slush (human excreta mixed with water).”
The IIT-M study was sponsored by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and submitted last week to the Union Ministry of Urban Affairs.
Despite the criticism, an additional 120,000 coaches are to be fitted with these bio-toilets, jointly developed by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and the Indian Railways, by December 2018. This is likely to cost Rs 1,200 crore, the railways revealed on November 2, in response to a Right to Information (RTI) request.
The bio-digester project began during the previous United Progressive Alliance regime. But the project has been speeded up under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Swachh Bharat campaign. The idea is to meet this target in time for the celebration of Mahatma Gandhi’s 150th
Indian Railways is often described as the world’s biggest toilet: It ejects around 3,980 tonnes of faecal matter — the equivalent of 497 truck-loads — onto rail tracks every day, according to a report released by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) in 2013.
The network has 9,000 passenger trains with 52,000 coaches with toilets that discharge human waste on to rail tracks. Covering 65,500 km across the country, these trains transport 24 million passengers every day, the equivalent of the population of Australia.
Since 1993, the Indian Railways have been experimenting with a host of technologies used worldwide to replace the open discharge system. This included vacuum toilets based on suction, commonly seen in aircraft; “controlled-discharge” toilet systems (CDTS) which allow waste to be dropped only after a train acquires a speed of 30 kmph, thus keeping stations clean; and “zero-discharge” toilets, in which solid waste is stored, evacuated and then dumped in pits for composting and the liquid filtered for recycling.
In 2008, the railways decided to install the bio-digester model developed by the Gwalior-based Defence Research and Development Establishment (DRDE).
Responding to the criticism of the bio-toilet, government officials said that the flaws are being fixed. “The issues regarding the bio-digesters are of a minor nature and are being effectively addressed. Some changes (in design or execution strategies) are inevitable, as this is a continuous process,” said Saxena.
Lokendra Singh, former director of the DRDE, had, after an expedition to Antarctica, brought home psychrophilic bacteria that can survive in extremely low temperatures. The bacteria were mixed with cow dung and normal soil, which have methogens (micro-organisms that produce methane) capable of breaking down human excreta. This was then supplied to the manufacturers of rail bio-digesters
“Because of the presence of a compound of bacteria, the bio-degradation process is set off in the toilet chambers-the bacteria eat up the organic matter (human excreta) and produce methane gas and water as byproducts,” Singh said.
But Singh’s claims of a scientific breakthrough using the bacteria from Antarctica have been questioned on several grounds, including the fact that the bacterium, as Singh admitted, has not obtained an independent or a third-party certification from an organisation such as the UIC (Federation of European Railways
Also, DRDO does not have a patent for the design or manufacture of these bio-toilets. A patent is necessary to market a commercial product. DRDO only has a patent for the design of “railway toilet tank”, as the organisation’s website reveals.
This is not the first time the railways’ bio-toilet project has been criticised. A 2009 study jointly conducted by the Lucknow-based Research Designs and Standards Organisation (RDSO) and IIT-Kanpur concluded that no treatment of human excreta was happening in the bio-digesters installed in railway toilets.
“We had found the discharge from these toilets as being no different from raw sewage,” said IIT-K professor Vinod Tare, who had headed the study, which the Railway Ministry has not made public.
On September 14, 2004, DRDO scientist Y. Ashok Babu sent a letter to the then Chief Vigilance Commissioner, Pradeep Kumar, terming the bio-toilets “farce (sic) technology”.
Singh rejected these allegations. “Frustrated scientists who have never worked on the project are raising such issues,” he said. “Of course, there are some problems but these are being addressed by the railways.”
Singh, who has assumed charge as the chairman of the Digesters and Bio-Toilet Manufacturers Association (DBMA) after his retirement from DRDE this year, said questions of “conflict of interest” did not apply in his case, as he held only an “honorary position with the DBMA”.
Documents available with IndiaSpend suggest that there are serious issues with the bio-toilet venture. These were discussed at a high-level meeting convened by the Railway Board on October 26, with functionaries from 17 zones.
During the last three years of the last government (2011-14), 9,350 bio-toilets were fitted in trains but the figure rose by 539 per cent, to 59,735, in the first three years of the NDA government (2014-17). In the current financial year (2017-18), 24,215 bio-toilets had been fitted until August 30, bringing the cumulative figure to 93,537, the railways said in its RTI reply of November 2.
In this period, the cost of manufacture and fitment of bio-toilets climbed from an average of Rs 52,000 per unit to over Rs 75,000 per unit. After the imposition of the Goods and Services Tax (GST), this cost burden has spiked further, with the railways having to absorb the 18 per cent levy.
“Cost escalation is inevitable, as manufacturing costs have been rising,” said Manoj Jha of Faridabad-based Arkin Technologies that manufactures and supplies bio-digesters to the railways.
In response to an RTI appeal from Dehradun-based activist Prabhu Dandriyal, the railways stated that the Hubli workshop of South Western Railways had been supplied 2,152 toilets at a cost of over Rs 22 crore during the financial year 2016-17. Based on this calculation, the current cost being borne by the railways works out to more than Rs 100,000 per unit.
By the time the task is completed, the railways are likely to exceed their budget of Rs 1,200 crore for additional bio-toilets. Arvind Dethe, a bio-toilet manufacturer based in Akola in Maharashtra, has been selling a similar toilet at Rs 6,000.
By Pradip R Sagar | Published: 08th October 2017 NEW DELHI: With a dream to work for his country after spending a successful stint overseas, Dr Gausal Ahmed Khan applied for the post of senior scientist in the country’s premier defence research institute—DRDO—in 2009. Eight years down the line, Khan’s dreams were shattered when he was forced to resign in September owing to ‘internal politics’.
Khan, a physiologist, worked on a project to reduce the acclimatisation time of Indian Army personnel stationed at high altitude locations like Siachen. He has written a letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi exposing nepotism, politics, and corruption prevailing in the DRDO. “Unfortunately my scientific temperament and hard work proved to be a disqualification in one of the country’s most reputed organisations—DRDO,” Khan wrote to the PM.
Dr Gausal Khan
“Bereaved, my broken and humiliated conscience prompted me to write to you and apprise you of the prevalent politics, corruption, and other work conditions in DRDO. I am writing with a hope that in future work condition in DRDO may improve and will prevent scientists from leaving the organisation,” he added.
While disclosing how he was involved in litigation after not given credit for his work, he said, “I spent the last three years in the organisation defending myself in unwanted litigations imposed on me by higher officials due to their politics, personal vengeance, and family lineage.”
Khan got some relief when he approached the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) against a disciplinary case imposed on him. The Tribunal in its order stated: “He has been conferred with ‘developing world scientist award’ at international level for his research of unique nature.
Assuming that there are some lapses on the applicant (scientist), the disciplinary authority should have taken a lenient view on account of the excellent scientific research by him which brought laurels not only individually for him but to the country as whole. However, the respondent (DRDO authorities) has not given due credit for his research in the scientific field. This depicts sorry state of affairs. Instead of appreciating his research work, he has been treated shabbily and awarded punishment in gross violation of law”.
When contacted Khan, who is leaving for the US, said, “I came with a vision and a dream. My working conditions forced me to leave. But before leaving, I wanted to apprise the top leaders of the poor work atmosphere. PM talks about self-reliance in defence, but we cannot achieve it unless we weed out corruption and internal politics.”
All non-core research activity of the DRDO must stop. Sudhi Ranjan Sen Deputy Editor (News) The Huffington Post 14/03/2017 3:40 PM IST
HINDUSTAN TIMES VIA GETTY IMAGES The Arjun tank stationed on the Parliament House premises for an exhibition in August 2016 in New Delhi, India.
India’s premier defence research organisation, Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), needs a major overhaul, some its research laboratories closed and the organisation needs to concentrate only on development of defence platforms, a high-level committee appointed by the Ministry of Defence has said in its report.
In the last five years, DRDO has been getting between ₹6,000-₹8,000 crore annually for defence research — roughly 6% of the defence budget.
The DRDO was set up in 1958 to achieve self-reliance in manufacturing weapon systems to equip the armed forces. It has over 33,000 personnel, which includes nearly 8,000 scientists, 13,000 technicians, and 52 laboratories. Its area of research is wide and encompasses everything, from juices to nuclear missiles.
Former Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar had constituted the committee led by Lieutenant General DB Shekatkar (Retired) in May 2016 to suggest ways to enhance the combat capabilities of India. The panel submitted its 550-page report to the government recently.
Top sources told HuffPost India the committee has said as many as 11 laboratories of the DRDO need to closed down or amalgamated and its “non-crore” research activities stopped. The committee also said that DRDO needs to work with “clearly defined” objectives to develop “weapon systems and platforms”.
Instead of the DRDO deciding on areas and focus of research, the committee has recommended setting up of a “Technology Commission”, headed by the defence minister, with representatives from the armed forces. The commission should formulate research and development policy and even set specific deadlines for research.
The committee feels that end-users — the three services — must be consulted on areas of research and development of weapon systems. To break the red-tape in the DRDO, the committee has suggested that DRDO scientists be given incentives for successful completion of projects.
Suggesting further reforms, the DB Shekatkar Committee has also said that Ordnance Factory Boards (OFB) — which produce bulk of the ammunition and weapons used by the forces — should consult the armed forces when inducting new technology or material. It has pointed to the fact that OFB, which produce rifles, wasn’t aware of the exact weight of the guns it was producing.
Interestingly, the committee has said that OFB needs to include private companies and has suggested using private-public partnerships to speed up production, ensure better quality and cut down delays.
This isn’t the first time an overhaul of the DRDO has been recommended. Questions have been frequently raised about the delays and cost over-runs in DRDO projects.
In a 2015 report, the Comptroller Auditor General (CAG) had pointed out that audit examination of 14 mission mode projects, carried out by DRDO laboratories, “revealed that all projects failed to achieve their timelines and the probable date of completion (PDC) was extended many a times”.
These mission mode projects include the crucial S-band surveillance system ‘Rohini’ radars, secure video and fax communication between airborne platforms and ground station ‘Meghdoot’ and electronic warfare suit for the modified MIG-29 fighters.
The delays, the CAG pointed out, “were mainly due to inadequate monitoring”.
Indian Military Issues: Progress through Debate Wednesday, April 1, 2015 DRDO: an Organisation in Need of Life Support System(FORCE MARCH 2015)Major General Mrinal Suman
No organisation ever exists in a vacuum. It has to have a purpose, an objective and a mission. The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) is no exception. Its mission statement includes ‘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 ‘develop infrastructure and committed quality manpower and build strong indigenous technology base’.
It is apparent from the above that DRDO has been created solely for the armed forces. As it is funded through the defence budget, the relation between DRDO and the armed forces is akin to that of a service provider to the clients. Therefore, it is the satisfaction level of the armed forces that is a true measure of its performance. Although client satisfaction is an abstract concept and involves a multitude of factors, it is an effective tool to gauge how well the expectations of a client are being met – some of the vital factors being quality of product, timeliness of delivery and value for money (a function of quality and price).
The track record of DRDO is abysmal to say the least. It has never developed any equipment in the promised time-frame and conforming to the parameters. The history of three key projects undertaken by DRDO is a true indicator of the gross inefficiency that afflicts it. Work on the development of the main battle tank Arjun commenced four decades ago in 1974; the LCA project was undertaken in 1983; and the project for the design and development of aero-engines for combat aircraft was started in 1989. DRDO has fared miserably in all the projects. Time and cost overruns have exposed DRDO’s appalling failure.
The concept of client satisfaction becomes irrelevant when a client lacks bargaining power. The services are a captive client of DRDO. They are decreed to accept sub-optimal equipment. Ask any soldier and he will tell you that DRDO is the biggest fraud being perpetrated on the nation and is responsible for the current ‘hollow state’ of the Indian armed forces. DRDO is variously described as ‘a white elephant’, ‘a national liability’ and ‘an impediment to the modernisation of the armed forces’.
Resistance to Reforms
Perhaps the most striking attribute of DRDO is its ability to survive and thrive, continued non-performance notwithstanding. For decades, it is being damned for its gross incompetence and failure to deliver. Yet, it continues to expand its empire unabated. Formed in 1958 as a single unified agency to handle all defence research and development activities with 10 laboratories, it has grown exponentially to 52 laboratories in multiple disciplines. It employs over 5,000 scientists and about 25,000 other scientific, technical and supporting personnel.
To deflect mounting criticism for its failure to develop high tech systems, it has resorted to highlighting production of commonly available products with much hype and fanfare. It boasts of having developed 18.6 meters high self supporting masts and bullet-proof podiums. These items are so commonplace that they are being produced by numerous road-side workshops.
Whereas R&D means invention and innovation, DRDO operates at the pedestrian level of duplication and improvisation. It considers reverse engineering and indigenisation of imported equipment to be the real research work. No wonder it has earned the dubious sobriquet of ‘Defence Replication and Duplication Organisation’.
Worse, due to its failure to develop scientific disposition and nurture an environment of innovations, DRDO has diverted its attention to spreading its domain. A major part of its budget is expended on the creation of world-class auditoriums, convention centres, conference halls and hostels. In other words, DRDO remains overly occupied with non-scientific activities.
Despite all the flak, it continues to flourish. The budget presented on 10 July 14 hiked its allocation from the previous year’s Rs 10,610 crore to Rs 15,283 crore, thereby raising the share of DRDO from the earlier 5 percent to nearly 7 percent of the defence budget now. Most observers felt that such a hike was hardly justified. But then DRDO excels in the management of self-promotion stratagems. It converts every act of inquisition into an opportunity to promote its own interests.
It was in February 2001 that the Group of Ministers on National Security had, in their report submitted to the Prime Minister, had advised DRDO ‘to focus more on core technologies, in which expertise is neither available within the country nor can be procured from alternative sources’. Three reviews followed thereafter and have been recalled here.
a)Censure by the Parliamentary Committee of Defence
The Standing Committee of Defence in its 14th Report had reviewed the functioning of DRDO. It expressed its unhappiness at the non-achievement of indigenisation targets and faulted DRDO for its failure to achieve self-reliance objectives.
The committee noted that scores of DRDO projects were plagued by time and cost overruns. It felt that delays cause suspicion on the capability of DRDO in the eyes of the users, the common man and intelligentsia. It opined that prior to accepting a development project, DRDO should sharpen its foresight to ascertain whether it could develop the required system within a fixed time frame and with available financial/technical resources or not.
The committee expressed its strong disapproval of DRDO venturing into fields unrelated to crucial defence research work and wanted it to concentrate on fundamental R&D for producing systems for strategic requirement of the armed forces. It suggested shedding of research work in the field of life sciences (food, agriculture, medicine, psychology, physical and allied disciplines) to other agencies.
Concerned at the disappointing performance, the committee suggested ‘a thorough review of its functioning and its organisational/structural set up, in order to identify the strength and weaknesses and to improve and strengthen the organisation to increase its efficiency to enable it to achieve organisational goals’. More importantly, it recommended constitution of an independent body of experts/professionals for defence research and development, on the lines of Atomic Energy Commission and Indian Space Research Organization.
b)Kelkar Committee Report
The Kelkar Committee Report of 2005 also recommended that DRDO should fully focus on cutting edge technology researches. It faulted the then existing system of DRDO undertaking indigenous development in respect of all proposals categorised as ‘Make’. The Committee suggested an integrated approach involving users, Ministry of Defence (MoD) and the industry in the ‘Make’ procedure. It wanted DRDO to confine itself to projects requiring sophisticated technology of strategic, complex and security sensitive nature. It further recommended outsourcing of high technology research and development work to private sector on the lines of parallel development on cost-sharing basis.
Consequent to the acceptance of the Kelkar Committee recommendations, ‘Make’ cases were further sub-categorised in Defence Procurement Procedure – 2006, as follows:-
‘Strategic, Complex and Security Sensitive Systems’. These projects are to be managed through Defence R&D Board, following DRDO procedure and utilising DRDO funds for execution.
‘Low Technology Mature Systems’. These projects are to be treated as ‘Buy Indian’, albeit with minimum 50 per cent indigenous content.
‘High Technology Complex Systems’. In a generic sense, projects under this category should be identified as ‘Make’ cases. These are to be undertaken by the Indian industry. All upgrade programmes categorised as ‘Make’ will also follow this procedure.
As is apparent, the role of DRDO was considerably curtailed and restricted to the development of ‘strategic, complex and security sensitive’ systems only. Development of lesser systems was taken out of the purview of DRDO. With reduced mandate, a reduction in the bloated organisation of DRDO was expected.
c)Rama Rao Committee Report
Consequent to the dissatisfaction expressed by the Parliamentary Committee and the acceptance of the Kelkar Committee Report, MoD set up a committee under the chairmanship of Dr P Rama Rao in February 2007 ‘to review the present organisational structure and to recommend necessary changes in the institutional, managerial, administrative and financial structures for improving the functioning of DRDO’. It was to be the first ever external review of DRDO.
The committee recommended the following measures:-
Establishment of a Defence Technology Commission with the Defence Minister as its Chairman.
Decentralisation of DRDO management.
Making DRDO a leaner organisation by merging some of the DRDO laboratories with other public funded institutions with similar discipline, interest and administrative system.
Engagement of an eminent Human Resource (HR) expert as consultant to revamp the entire HR structure of DRDO.
Establishment of a commercial arm of DRDO.
In June 2009, a committee under the chairmanship of the Defence Secretary was tasked to study the committee report and the comments received from various stake holders; and evolve a set of acceptable recommendations. On the acceptance of the recommendations of the Defence Secretary by the government, restructuring of DRDO was announced by MoD in mid-May 2010.
The Art of Converting Adversity into Opportunity
As seen above, DRDO has been getting flak for neglecting its primary task of producing state-of-the-art equipment for the armed forces and squandering scarce defence budget on totally unrelated activities like producing ‘Namkeen Herbal Tea’, juices/creams and breeding angora rabbits. Appearing before the Parliamentary Committee of Defence, the then Defence Minister had conceded that ‘DRDO should mainly concentrate on high-end research, particularly in critical and strategic areas’. It showed that the government had agreed with the views of all the review committees that DRDO should not waste its efforts on non-defence fields.
One cannot help marvel at the dexterity with which DRDO has managed the complete gamut of much-hyped reforms. There is nothing in the approved restructuring plan to suggest that any thought has been given to improve R&D performance of the organisation. All critical recommendations made by the above mentioned committees have been ignored. On the contrary, DRDO has managed to have its way by making selective use of the recommendations to convert an adversity into a blessing to further its own organisational interests.
The approved restructuring plan makes interesting reading. In addition to setting up the new Defence Technology Commission, decentralisation of DRDO management is to be achieved through the formation of seven centres based on functionalities and technology domain of laboratories. Each centre is to be headed by a Director General. The present Director General of DRDO is to be re-designated as Chairman, DRDO.
Leaving aside token shedding of three laboratories, not a single measure suggests any radical reform. Net result of the above restructuring is nil. On the contrary, seven new posts of Director Generals at centres have been created, making the organisation more top-heavy and bureaucratic. Every centre will now have a Centre Headquarters with subordinate staff and secretarial support. Director of a laboratory will not be able to approach DRDO Headquarters directly as another link in the form of centre has been interposed. Decision- making will get further delayed.
Mastery of Survival Technique
It is indeed surprising that an organisation that consumes considerable national resources, delves in mediocre research work, fails to upgrade defence technological base in the country and impedes modernisation of the armed forces can survive for the last six decades. More shocking is the fact that the government is fully aware of the failure of DRDO to deliver but is unable to muster enough courage to force reforms. DRDO adroitly uses the catchphrase of self-reliance for the furtherance of its own agenda.
The secret of DRDO’s continued survival and expansion lies in the patronage that it cultivates. It keeps key functionaries happy through extensive networking. Many consider DRDO to be the ‘bankers to MoD’. Due to the flexibility of its procedure, DRDO is in a position to oblige other wings of MoD by providing facilities from its sources. DRDO is often asked to bear expenditure for many events under the façade of becoming co-sponsors. To silence criticism from the armed forces, it has started dangling the carrot of post-retirement employment as adviser/consultant to senior service officers, especially the Vice Chiefs.
Another aspect that needs mention is the prevailing ‘Old Boys Club’ culture. No one ever retires in DRDO. Persons who contributed little during their active service life are allowed to subsist on the defence budget for years after retirement as well. Extensions and re-employments are routine. Although it prevents infusion, retention and blossoming of young talent, DRDO hierarchy remains totally unconcerned.
One marvels at the deftness with which DRDO has withstood all the criticism heaped on it by various committees. Instead of succumbing to their pressure, it has cleverly exploited their reports to consolidate its powers further and create additional vacancies at senior levels.
Conclusion
DRDO has earned the dubious distinction of being India’s most inefficient, sloth and wasteful organisation. There is hardly any other organisation in the country that has failed the nation so very appallingly. Many consider DRDO to be beyond redemption and suggest it’s winding up. But that will be an imprudent step. Neither the massive infrastructure built over the years nor the technical pool gathered should be wasted.
The new government has already displayed its resolve to improve matters. It has removed DRDO head. Now is the time to crack the whip to force comprehensive reforms. As mandated in the new procurement procedure, DRDO should be forced to concentrate exclusively on strategic, complex and security sensitive systems, especially those which are likely to be circumscribed by denial regimes. DRDO must never forget that it exists exclusively for the development of defence technologies.
It should be made a leaner and focused body. All laboratories engaged in unrelated activities must be shed. Manpower policies must be corrected to acquire a younger profile. No one should be granted extensions. Young talent must be retained through better career prospects and freedom of professional pursuits. As desired by the Prime Minister, some laboratories must be headed by bright young scientists.
Additionally, DRDO must be subjected to performance audit regularly. It should be held responsible for the claims that it makes. Certain failures and delays are inherent in all R&D works and must be accepted as justified risks. However, DRDO must not be able to get away with tall claims which it knows are totally outside the realm of possibility. Finally, a strong accountability system is indispensable. It not only raises the bar of efficiency but also breeds a culture of responsibility.*****
Major General Mrinal Suman
A highly qualified and experienced officer, General Suman commanded an Engineer Regiment in the Siachen Glacier area and was awarded the gold medal for being ‘the most outstanding engineer of the year’. He was the Task Force Commander at Pokharan and was responsible for designing and sinking shafts for the nuclear tests, for which he was duly honoured by the President of India. He superannuated in 2003. He heads Defence Technical Assessment and Advisory Service of CII and has also been directing their much acclaimed Defence Acquisition Management Courses, both in India and abroad. Being the first Technical Manager [Land Systems], he was closely associated with the evolution of the new defence procurement mechanism. Today, he is considered to be India’s foremost expert on myriad aspects of India’s defence procurement regime and offsets. He is a prolific writer and his articles are regularly published in a large number of journals. He is regularly invited to address various chambers, industrial delegations and seminars in India and abroad. He is often consulted by the policy makers. His views are also sought by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence.
Appeal to clean DRDO of corrupt and anti-national officials
