Tag Archives: organisation

Drdo

An old age problem -DRDO has become ageing body with top scientists on extension

7 Comments

For a country that boasts of one of the youngest populations in the world, it is strange that the field that perhaps deals with the most cutting-edge technology is dominated by scientists past their prime. Most top scientists at the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) who are tasked with creating future weapons are past the retirement age of 60 and are on service extensions.

Indeed, such is the state of affairs that the head of the research organisation, which encompasses 54 establishments and labs dealing with fields as diverse as ballistic missile defence and insect repellent cream, will get an 18-month contractual tenure from November when he turns 64, the maximum age till which service extensions can be given. This extraordinary contract, beyond the remit of extensions, was specially approved by the previous UPA government more than a year in advance for the present DRDO Chairman Avinash Chander.

Though not new, the old age crisis of the lumbering organisation has worsened as private sector prospects have brightened for young scientists. Internal surveys have found that nearly 87 per cent of the young scientists who join DRDO soon get disenchanted with the archaic, rigid structure of the research body that does not reward extraordinary performance with proportional career growth. Annual intake of new scientists has dropped to just 70, barely enough to replace those who take early retirement, thereby, rapidly increasing DRDO’s age profile.

It is still early to judge the Narendra Modi Government’s policies, but the perception that it is taking a strong stand on the issue has brought cheer to hundreds of young scientists itching to prove their worth in DRDO’s labs across India. A series of events, from the Prime Minister’s remark on promoting young scientists to the cabinet secretariat’s stinging order curbing DRDO’s unilateral age extensions to its scientists, have raised hopes that the problem is finally being addressed.

It’s about time, too. As many as 10 of the 16 top DRDO scientists are on extension. Apart from Chander, nine of the top-graded `Distinguished Scientists should have retired, but most are now on their second extension.

Rules mandate that DRDO scientists must retire at 60. They can, however, be given two two-year extensions under,extraordinary circumstances. Beyond the age of 64, there is no provision for service extension. Yet, the UPA government, in May 2013, approved an Appointments Committee of the Cabinet note to give an 18-month extension to Chander following his “date of retirement of 30.11.2014 on contract basis, with the same terms and conditions as he would be entitled to before the date of retirement”.

By doing this, the UPA went back on its promise to appoint a younger head to DRDO. (Both V.K. Saraswat and M. Natarajan, who preceded Chander, retired at 64.) The special provision made for Chander has become the subject matter of several complaints, the latest by one of DRDO’s own, younger scientists to the cabinet secretariat in August. “The post-retirement contract is not legal and has been made against the rules. A contractual employee can be taken for an advisory role but not to head an organisation,” Navin Gupta, the Kanpur-based DRDO Scientist ‘C’, said in his complaint.

While a convincing argument can be made that age is no criterion for innovation and that experience and continuity is needed to deal with certain technology areas, most scientists on extension in the DRDO are handling primarily administrative positions- from most director generals at the headquarters to the heads of six of DRDO’s 54 labs and establishments.

The impact of the extensions policy on DRDO’s talent pool is immense: an internal survey found that most of its entry-level scientists are unhappy about their career prospects and some 57 per cent of all scientists leave the organisation prematurely due to lack of professional satisfaction. Since 2008, nearly 500 entry and mid-level scientists have resigned or taken early retirement while intake of new scientists has barely kept pace. At a seminar on August 20, Chander admitted this was a problem that required urgent attention. “DRDO’s annual intake of young scientists has dipped to 70 per year, resulting in a rapidly rising average age which certainly is not a good sign for an innovation-centric organisation,” he said. The average age of DRDO scientists is creeping closer to 40.

When Modi, speaking immediately after Chander at the same function, said that at least five DRDO labs should only employ scientists under 35, it was the first indication that his Government was addressing the problem. Many thought that the PM picked the number, five, randomly, unaware that it had come from the most in-depth review of the DRDO ever done.

The review, conducted by the Rama Rao Committee in 2008, had identified five labs working in critical fields such as solid state physics, metallurgy, cryptology and lasers for ‘empowered‘ status in order to give them the liberty to quickly induct young talent, bypassing the cumbersome selection process.

The voluminous report suggested other far-reaching reforms, but the UPA government never fully implemented it. The new Government has dusted it and top officials are studying its recommendations. These include revamping the human resource structure to enable DRDO to hire talent from outside, including Indians working abroad, for key technologies; identifying a set of ’empowered labs’ that have the freedom to hire and fire scientists; lowering the age of entry of talent; and looking abroad for key innovators. “A balance has to be struck. The optimised path may be being selective in granting extensions for specific research projects and not for administrative roles,” says Air Marshal Ajit Bhavnani (retd), who was a member of the review committee.

As for the old age issue, one of the first things the Modi regime has done, at least, is get the cabinet secretariat to issue a terse circular on September 26, directing DRDO to stop the practice of unilaterally granting age extensions to its scientists without the approval of the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet, which is headed by the Prime Minister. Sources say extensions have been put on hold and all such future requests would be critically examined. Whether the Government is firm in this resolve will be tested by the upcoming grant of a contract extension to the DRDO chairman.

India Today
India Today
DRDO Chairman Avinash Chander with Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
DRDO Chairman Avinash Chander with Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

 

Drdo

Supreme Court to examine DRDOs exclusion under section 24

Leave a comment

17 Aug, 2014- RTI Foundation of India

On a petition filed by Dr. Neelam Bhalla, a scientist at DRDO, a Bench of Justices Dipak Misra and V. Gopala Gowda of the Supreme Court issued a notice to the Centre and the DRDO. The petitioner was transferred to a different unit and she filed an application under the Right to Information (RTI) Act seeking the reasons for her transfer.

Her application was turned down by the DRDO and her second appeal was rejected by the Central Information Commission. On failure to get any relief from the Delhi High Court, she moved the apex court contending that only that information which directly affected and correlated to “intelligence and security” could be exempted and the information which were general in nature should not be denied.

She has demanded that records relating to their services should be provided. Bhalla has challenged the interpretation of section 24 of the Right to Information Act in the context of the exclusion of exempted organisations listed in schedule II such as the DRDO.

The petition says that wilful disclosure of incorrect or false or misleading information relating to routine matters such as transfer not only to the petitioner but also to higher authorities, namely the Minister of Defence and the National Commission for Women, to justify their actions, was an offence under the newly enacted Whistle Blowers Protection Act.

Bhalla has alleged that she was a victim of gender discrimination and humiliation at the hands of senior scientists. When she filed a complaint before the NCW against the alleged nepotism and lapses in the policy of recruitment, the task for the recruitment of scientists ‘B’ was selectively taken away from her.

She has sought directions to disclose the reasons for her transfer through the Apex Court. Now the matter would be heard by the SC to decide whether the defence organisations such as the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) can withhold information regarding transfer of an employee, claiming exemption under section 24 of the Right to Information Act. Section 24 of the RTI Act, 2005 is reproduced below:

– 24. Act not to apply in certain organizations.-

(1) Nothing contained in this Act shall apply to the intelligence and security organisations specified in the Second Schedule, being organisations established by the Central Government or any information furnished by such organisations to that Government:

Provided that the information pertaining to the allegations of corruption and human rights violations shall not be excluded under this sub-section: Provided further that in the case of information sought for is in respect of allegations of violation of human rights, the information shall only be provided after the approval of the Central Information Commission, and notwithstanding anything contained in section 7, such information shall be provided within forty-five days from the date of the receipt of request.

(2) The Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, amend the Schedule by including therein any other intelligence or security organisation established by that Government or omitting therefrom any organisation already specified therein and on the publication of such notification, such organisation shall be deemed to be included in or, as the case may be, omitted from the Schedule.

(3) Every notification issued under sub-section (2) shall be laid before each House of Parliament.

(4) Nothing contained in this Act shall apply to such intelligence and security organisation being organisations established by the State Government, as that Government may, from time to time, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify: Provided that the information pertaining to the allegations of corruption and human rights violations shall not be excluded under this sub-section: (2) The Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, amend the Schedule by including therein any other intelligence or security organisation established by that Government or omitting therefrom any organisation already specified therein and on the publication of such notification, such organisation shall be deemed to be included in or, as the case may be, omitted from the Schedule.

(3) Every notification issued under sub-section (2) shall be laid before each House of Parliament.

(4) Nothing contained in this Act shall apply to such intelligence and security organisation being organisations established by the State Government, as that Government may, from time to time, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify: Provided that the information pertaining to the allegations of corruption and human rights violations shall not be excluded under this sub-section: Provided further that in the case of information sought for is in respect of allegations of violation of human rights, the information shall only be provided after the approval of the State Information Commission and, notwithstanding anything contained in section 7, such information shall be provided within forty-five days from the date of the receipt of request.

(5) Every notification issued under sub-section (4) shall be laid before the State Legislature.

Drdo

Dire need to speed up DRDO’s output

Leave a comment

Lt Gen Harwant Singh (retd), Hindustan Times  Chandigarh, August 29, 2014

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has called upon Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) to speed up projects and advance delivery schedules. He has said that India can be world leader in defence technology and show the way forward to the world.

These are very high expectations and there is nothing in the DRDO’s past performance to generate such great hopes. In fact, the record of this organisation is extremely dismal.

There is no accountability and it has never been put through a science audit, in spite of repeated demands.

On the urging of the parliamentary committee on defence, a revamp of DRDO was carried out. Nothing much happened, except for some cosmetic changes, which are of little consequence.

We continue to import even low-technology equipment where over 70% of weapons and equipment is imported. Think of the outflow of foreign exchange and the jobs lost.

While the Prime Minister is unaware of the DRDO capabilities and potential, but surely, Arun Jaitley, the part-time defence minister, who has been in Parliament for a long time and is expected to have paid attention to debates on defence matters, ought to know better and, therefore, should have briefed the Prime Minister to lower his expectations from this organisation. In the past, these false hopes of delivery by DRDO have kept in limbo the deployment of private industry in this field.

DRDO budget

The DRDO budget has been 5% to 7% of the defence budget with allocations for major projects such as LCA, Arjun tank, etc being over and above this budgeted figure. Much of this amount has gone into civil works. If any proof of this lavish expenditure is required, one need go no further than have a look at the DRDO office complex at the rear of South Block and then of course see Sena Bhavan as well.

Those in the ministry of defence (MoD), who exercise control over DRDO, are blissfully ignorant of what defence equipment is all about. In weapons, they can’t tell a gun from a howitzer, and in engines, a cam shaft from a crank shaft. Projects can hang fire for decades while those responsible for these continue to move up the promotion ladder and so do those of the MoD who control them.

There is little understanding and mutual confidence between the DRDO and the defence services. The Prime Minister is aware of the disconnect, and that is why he impressed upon the DRDO to involve user in the development of military weapons and equipment.

The DRDO never spells out its technological status in relation to the equipment to be developed. With the result, GSQRs are prepared without proper interaction with the DRDO, but keeping in mind what is already in the market.

The DRDO never seeks the scaling down of the GSQRs to a level at which it can handle projects, in the full knowledge and belief that the project can be dragged on endlessly and that no one will be called upon to account. Once a project is taken on, complete secrecy prevails and service officers posted with these establishments are kept out of the loop.

Little achievement

The DRDO in stand-alone mode has achieved little and will not be able to meet the future needs of the armed forces. It has shown little skill and capability in the field of even reverse engineering of comparatively simple equipment. This is legacy of the Nehruvian policies of entrusting all this to the public sector (DRDO in this case). Since then vested interests have opposed any change in this moribund policy.

When the USSR broke up, some governments of east European countries offered to shift state-of-the-art defence industries to other countries. India spurned these offers, while China took two thousand scientists and some of the defence industrial units. In India, there is a politico-bureaucratic nexus which has successfully thwarted such moves, for obvious reasons. There is so much money to be made in imports, the Augusta helicopter being the more recent example.

However, the government did go in for military technology cooperation with the Russian government and later with some others for joint development of cutting-edge defence technologies. So far, this has been a one-sided affair, ending, essentially in transfer of technology and the attendant cost.

Measures to be taken

If the new government is to make a positive impact on the future indigenous development of defence technologies, production of such equipment within the country and its export, it need shed the hope of achieving this with only the DRDO efforts. It needs to consider some of these measures:

Close down those establishments of DRDO which are busy re-inventing the wheel, and those whose tasks can best be done in the private sector. Get it out of the control of the MoD. Equally do away with most of the defence ordnance factories. Pass on production of such equipment to the private sector.

It is DRDO component grouped with the navy that has performed well. This has essentially been due to direct control that the navy has exercised over this component. Of the three establishments, one is always commanded by a naval officer and the other two have a number of naval officers on their establishment. Thus a series of projects have been successfully completed: some on their own and some others as part of collaboration with certain foreign companies. Nuclear submarine is one such example.

Restructure the MoD as an integrated organisation, consisting of bureaucrats, defence services staff, scientists and financial experts. It would ensure better coordination, cutting out duplication and triplication of work, improved efficiency and speedy decision-making. Integrated defence planning and defence technology development have become an inescapable necessity. Such a step will be opposed, tooth and nail, by the bureaucracy but it is the political executive which must take the final call.

Implement the Arun Singh Committee report, as accepted by the cabinet, and adopt the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) system. The DRDO needs to be placed under the CDS, which will result in mutual confidence and better interaction with the services and bring in efficiency and good performance.

Pending adoption of the CDS system, DRDO’s various establishments need to be grouped with the army and IAF on same lines as for the navy.

If we are serious in attracting high-tech equipment manufacturing companies to collaborate with Indian companies, then the FDI limit will have to be increased to 51%. The FDI limit of 49% announced by the finance minister was perhaps on the advice of the babus and urgings by others with vested interests. The Prime Minister during his forthcoming visit to the US must throw open invitation to American defence industry to establish manufacturing facilities in India, in collaboration with Indian companies.

Unless the above listed steps are urgently taken, and the status quo broken, the Prime Minister’s expectations of India developing high-end defence equipment and becoming self-sufficient in this field and being an exporter of such equipment will remain a distant dream.

(The writer, a former deputy chief of army staff, is commentator on security and defence matters. The views expressed are personal)

Drdo

PM scraps DRDO’s ‘retirement benefits’ committee

12 Comments

ABHINANDAN MISHRA New Delhi | 20th Sep 2014 – The Sunday Gaurdian
Prime Minister Narendra Modi has decided to scrap the Departmental Peer Review Committee (DPRCs) of the Defence Research Development Organisation (DRDO) in an attempt to revamp the outfit. The main job of this committee of DRDO scientists is to grant extensions to fellow scientists. The committee has come under scrutiny after complaints that all that these scientists do is to park retiring and retired colleagues in important posts year after year. “The PM has ordered the scrapping of the committee that reviews cases to grant extension of service to scientists who are superannuating. Giving repeated extensions to scientists, whose capabilities could be questioned, is one of the major problems with the DRDO,” a DRDO official said.sunday gaurdians clip

Sources said that 15 top scientists in DRDO, including Director General (DG) Avinash Chander, are on extension. After getting two extensions, Chander is now on contract. “What should have been an exception, has become a norm here. Every year, six to eight senior people in DRDO get extensions. This has led to an alarming attrition rate in the organisation,” said a scientist who has been working with DRDO for the last 12 years. In the seven years between 2007 and 2013, at least 687 scientists left the organisation, which comes to a rate of 100 scientists leaving the organisation every year.

The DRDO, best known for missing manufacturing deadlines, is gearing up for a hard time after PM Modi told its scientists and officials that their lackadaisical approach would not be tolerated anymore. Last month, while addressing the annual award function of the organisation in the national capital, the PM expressed his unhappiness over the way things were working in the organisation.

“The Prime Minister is clearly unhappy with the way the DRDO has been functioning, as most of our projects are running years behind schedule, resulting in cost overruns and compromising of national security. During the event, he made sure that that senior officials were made aware of his views on the subject and the fact that such lackadaisical approach would not work anymore. With the government approving 49% FDI in defence, we need to start performing now,” said a senior DRDO official. Modi, while commenting on DRDO said that the organisation “should not say in 2014 that a project conceived in 1992 will take some more time”.

DRDO, founded in 1958, has a network of 54 laboratories, employs close to 35,000 employees including 7,500 scientists. In July this year, the BJP-led NDA government increased DRDO’s budget from Rs 5,985 crore — as provided by the UPA’s interim Budget in February — to Rs 9,298 crore, the largest ever increase in the organisation’s history.

However, despite being treated with extreme care by successive governments, DRDO has still not been able to shake off the negative image associated with it. Most of its projects, ranging from Tejas light combat aircraft and long-range surface-to-air missile systems to NAG missiles are running years behind schedule.

According to officials, at least ten major projects that are being worked on by the DRDO have exceeded their stipulated date. “The major ones among these are the light combat aircraft, naval light combat aircraft, aero engine Kaveri, airborne early warning and control aircraft, long range surface-to-air missile, air-to-air missile Astra, advanced lightweight torpedo, dual colour missile approach warning system for fighter aircraft. If you include the minor ones, like the NAG missile system, then the number of incomplete projects will become even more,” the official stated.

According to a former bureaucrat, who had worked in the Ministry of Defence, the government has been always generous when it came to funding the DRDO. “The DRDO has never suffered from any paucity of funds. The main problem with the organisation is at the top. No accountability is fixed on them. There is no other place where you will find senior officials being given repeated extensions despite doing nothing.”

The former bureaucrat added that he had come across instances where the country’s defence preparedness suffered because the DRDO first made a commitment that it would manufacture the product, but when the deadline arrived, it did not have the product. And in cases where the product was there, the quality was not acceptable. “It is a shame that due to DRDO’s inefficiency the country has to import more than half of its defence requirements,” he said.

Even the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) has time and again come down heavily on the DRDO. “Year after year, the CAG has revealed the kind of mismanagement that has been happening in the DRDO. In February this year, CAG audits revealed that the DRDO spent Rs 52 crore to buy a cooling substance, which was to be used in the NAG missile system in 2007. The interesting part is that the NAG was not operational at the time and it is still not operational. Can you expect such kind of mismanagement from any other defence organisation in the world elsewhere?” an official with the DRDO said.

According to him, the onus of revamping the DRDO is with the Defence Minister. “The DRDO officials and the defence ministry bureaucrats will not take the bull by the horn; no one wants to disturb the status quo. It is the Defence Minister who needs to do it. The minister needs to implement the recommendation of the first-ever external review report of the DRDO, which was prepared by an independent committee of experts headed by P. Rama Rao, former secretary, Department of Science & Technology, and former ISRO man Dr Brahm Prakash. It had recommended a massive restructuring of the 50-year-old body to make it more effective,” the official said.

However, Ravi Kumar Gupta, Director, Directorate of Public Interface, DRDO, said that the PM was very appreciative of the work being done by the organisation during his interaction with the officials last month. “He has positive views about the organisation and said that the organisation had a lot of potential and whatever we were doing, we were doing it in a professional way. He also said that just as it holds true for any other organisation, we too should not lose focus and follow the chalta hai attitude,” Gupta said.

Drdo

Narendra Modi extremely unhappy with DRDO’s failure to meet deadlines in delivering products

Leave a comment

BHAVNA VIJ AURORA,ET Bureau | Aug 23, 2014, 12.19 PM IST – The Times of India
NEW DELHI: When defence minister Arun Jaitley commissions Indian Naval Ship Kamorta on Saturday in Vizag, it will be bereft of the critical mediumrange surface-to-air missile (SAM) and advanced light towed array sonars (ALTAS) — both of which Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has failed to deliver.
This is not the first failure for DRDO, the only body in the country doing research in the field of defence systems. Prime Minister Narendra Modi had commissioned INS Kolkata on August 16 in Mumbai.

That too was without the crucial long-range SAM systems and ALTAS.drdo award 2014

Extremely unhappy about the state of affairs, Modi has put DRDO on notice. With the government approving 49% FDI in defence, the PM has asked the tardy organisation to shape-up in the face of competition from the private sector. Officials in the security setup of the country told ET that Modi has asked the defence minister to conduct a detailed review of the organisation, and if need be come out with a white paper on it.

Modi personally delivered a stern message to DRDO, asking the officers to give up their “chalta hai” (lackadaisical) attitude, during the annual award ceremony of the organisation on August 20. The PM had started the DRDO clean-up project even before he attended the award function. He ordered scrapping of a committee that was reviewing cases to grant extension of service to scientists, who had superannuated. The committee sent its recommendations to the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet.

As many as 15 top scientists of DRDO, including Director General (DG) Avinash Chander, are on extension. Chander, in fact, is now on contract after two extensions. Incidentally, he holds three posts — Secretary (Defence) R&D, DG (DRDO) and Scientific Advisor to the defence minister. It was the previous ACC, under the UPA government, comprising Manmohan Singh, AK Antony and Sushil Kumar Shinde that had granted him extensions and finally appointed him on contract in November 2013. About six to eight people were believed to be getting extensions each year in DRDO.

“The PM was not happy about it. As per a department of personnel and training (DoPT) ruling, only the best scientists of international stature should be considered for extensions. He asked for all the details. He was told about the high attrition rate among the younger scientists,” disclosed a senior defence ministry official.

The review committee, scrapped by the government, comprised secretaries of Department of Atomic Energy, DRDO and ISRO as members. Modi is believed to have said that the secretaries of the same departments could not review extensions of their own personnel. He has now constituted the committee to include the Cabinet Secretary and secretaries of unrelated departments of science and technology and earth sciences.

“It is to weed out the dead wood that Modi made the announcement about employing only young scientists, not over the age of 35, in five of the 52 DRDO labs. It is a beginning and will send the message to everyone working in DRDO to deliver,” explained the defence ministry official.

DRDO spokesperson Ravi Gupta could not be contacted for a comment.

Drdo

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

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

Subject

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

Hon’ble Sir,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

i.        IPR Form issued by DOPT.

ii.        Snaps of IAS IPR Information System.

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

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

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

Copy to:

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

 

Drdo

Corruption Cases of Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director, DMSRDE, Kanpur

Leave a comment
To                                                                                                        Date 5th July 2014                  
Hon’ble
Shri Arun Jaitly,
Defence Minister,
South Block, New Delhi-110011

Subject: Corruption cases of  Dr.  Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director, DMSRDE, Kanpur

Sir,

Defence Materials and Stores Research & Development Establishment (DMSRDE), Kanpur is one of the establishments under Defence Research & Development Organisation. Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena was appointed as Director, DMSRDE, Kanpur with effect from 01 January 2011 and he is posted in DMSRDE, Kanpur since 28 April 1984. In past 30 years he developed deep connections with local vendors and after his appointment as Director since 01 Jan 2011, these pet vendors are playing major role in procurement of stores & items.

  1. As vigilant & patriot citizen of the country, I filed 12 complaints on issues of Corruption against Dr.  Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director, DMSRDE to CVC and Hon’ble Defence Minister with proofs. Details of complaints on Corruption against Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena is enclosed as Annexure-1.
  2. CVC has informed me vide his various letter & sms that my all 12 complaints have been forwarded to CVO, Ministry of Defence but till date no action has been taken against Dr.  Arvind Kumar Saxena. Copies of letters from CVC are annexed as Annexure-2.
  3. Since copies of all these complaints were also sent to Shri Avinash Chander, DGR&D, DRDO and Scientific Advisor to Raksha Mantri but till date no action has been taken against Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena by Shri Avinash Chander, DGR&D, DRDO.
  4. The two statutory rules viz CCS (Conducts) Rule 1964 and CCS (CCA) Rules 1965 have been framed by Government of India for maintaining good conduct and discipline. Under Rule 14, Government of India Order on “Inquiry Officers to be senior in rank to the officers enquired against” it is mandatory that inquiry officer –Chairman as well as all members Inquiry Committee should be one  rank senior to the officer whose conduct is being inquired into. This principle has been reiterated in CVC Vigilance Manual, Railway Manual, CPWD Manual and all other DOPT Manuals.
  5. Shri Avinash Chander, DGR&D, DRDO and Scientific Advisor to Raksha Mantri is giving patronage to corrupt practices of Dr.  Arvind Kumar Saxena and promoting corrupt officers in the organisation. One simple example of patronage to Dr.  Arvind Kumar Saxena by Shri Avinash Chander, DG R&D, DRDO is to constitute an illegal Fact Finding Committee in Jan-Feb 2014 for inquiring complaints against Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena. In this committee Shri SS Negi, Scientist ‘H’ was Chairman and Mr. Manoj Bali, Scientist ‘G’ and Shri Jagdeep, Scientist ‘F’ was members. This Committee was totally illegal as Chairman was of equivalent rank and two members of FFC were very junior to Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena. This establishes that Shri Avinash Chander, DG R&D, DRDO wilfully constituted an illegal committee for giving patronage & protection to corruption in DMSRDE, Kanpur by Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena. Intentions of Shri Avinash Chander, DGR&D, DRDO is very open to protect corrupt officer Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena by any means.
  6. This Fact Finding Committee took only one complaint out of my several complaints and gave false report despite FFC did not interact with me and all proofs were submitted along with complaints. That complaint was regarding procurement of ‘REACTOR’. The said REACTOR was procured by DMSRDE in 2012 and REACTOR was supplied to DMSRDE in January 2013. Till date payment of said REACTOR has not been made to the vendor.
  7. In light of the above, in the interest of organisation, I kindly request you to take appropriate action against Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director, DMSRDE   and issue directives to CVO (MOD) to speed up the investigation on my complaints.

With kind regards,

(Prabhu Dandriyal)
21, Sundarwala, Raipur Road
Dehradun-248008

Phone – 0135- 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,
e-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com   website – www.corruptionindrdo.com 

Copy to:

  1. Hon’ble Shri Narendra Modi, Prime Minister of India, PMO, New Delhi.
  2. Shri Avinash Chander, DGR&D, DRDO and SA to RM, New Delhi.
  3. Chief Vigilance Officer, Ministry of Defence, South Block, New Delhi.

Annexure:

  1. Details of complaints on Corruption against Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena to CVC.
  2. Copies of letters from CVC.

 

List of Complaints to CVC against
Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director, DMSRDE, Kanpur
list of complaints dmsrde
INFORMATION PROVIDED BY CVC ON COMPLAINTS AGAINST
DR. ARVIND KUMAR SAXENA, DIRECTOR, DMSRDE, KANPUR

RTI was filed to CVC on 29 Jan 2014 and ACPIO replied vide letter No. CVC/RTI/13/1862-24017 that “Information has been gathered, a suitable reply will be sent shortly”.

Vide letter No. CVC/RTI/13/1862/241925 dated 18.03.2014 CPIO, CVC informed that:

  1. Complaint dated 29.11.2013 was sent for necessary action to CVO, MOD vide OM No. 1323/2014/V9 dated 30.01.2014.
  2. Compliant dated 17.12.2013 was sent for necessary action to CVO, MOD vides OM No. 2056/2014/V9 dated 19.02.2014.
  3. Complaints dated 24.12.2013, 26.12.2013, 22.01.2014 have been received in the Commission and their complaint Nos. are 5022/2014/Vigilance9, 4967/2014/ Vigilance9 & 5387/2014/Vigilance9 respectively. These complaints are under consideration in the Commission.
  4. Complaints dated 28.12.2013, 06.01.2014 & 09.01.2014 have been received and these have been sent to CVO, MOD for necessary action vide Commissions OM No. 30714/2013/Vigilance9 dated 26.12.2013, 3617/2014/Vigilance9 dated 10.03.2014 respectively.
  5. Complaints dated 12 Jan 2014, 06 Feb 2014 & 03 March 2014 are consideration of Commission.
  6. Complaint dated 11 June 2014 has been forwarded to CVO (MOD) for further action.
  7. Complaint 13248/2014 has been forwarded to CVO (MOD) for further action on 26th June 2014
Drdo

By The Way, I Dropped It

1 Comment

EXCLUSIVE
INTELLIGENCE SECURITY BREACHES
By The Way, I Dropped It
India’s defence data could be an open secret. Ask the NTRO bosses who lost their laptops.
SAIKAT DATTA – OUTLOOK INDIA.COM

MAGAZINE | AUG 30, 2010

The Agni missile: India’s nuclear delivery mechanism could well be in enemy knowledge
The Agni missile: India’s nuclear delivery mechanism could well be in enemy knowledge

In 2006, Ravind Sistala was one among a clutch of scientists on deputation from the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) to the National Technical Research Organisation (NTRO) in New Delhi. Set up in the aftermath of the 1999 Kargil War, NTRO was meant to be a single technical intelligence facility to keep watch on India’s hostile neighbours. It was also supposed to issue warning signals to those manning India’s missile systems and nuclear warheads in real time so that they could retaliate in case of a possible enemy strike. Sistala’s was a crucial job. The fortysomething was the centre director of NTRO’s missile monitoring division, a position that called for high levels of responsibility and secrecy. But very few within India’s security apparatus are aware, even today, that Sistala was involved in one of the biggest security breaches in India’s post-Independence history. He compromised a Rs 1,850-crore intelligence-gathering programme that had key linkages to India’s growing nuclear arsenal and missile systems. Unencrypted ‘Top Secret’ data pertaining to these was stored on Sistala’s Hewlett-Packard laptop (given to him by NTRO) which disappeared mysteriously while he was on his way to the Delhi airport in early 2006. Did the information-packed computer fall into the wrong hands? Was it stolen by an enemy agent? Even today, no one knows where the laptop is. If still in enemy hands, it has the potential to inflict immense damage.

Ideally, such a security leak should have set alarm bells ringing and occasioned a swift and thorough investigation by the IB, RAW and Delhi Police. But rather than give the incident the attention and inquiry it deserved, a small but extremely powerful group of people—comprising a PMO official, DRDO scientists on deputation to NTRO and intelligence officials—helped Sistala escape any indictment by holding just an in house inquiry, which unearthed little. The missing laptop forgotten, Sistala continued as the head of the sensitive missile programme for another two years, and then returned to the DRDO.

Two years after the Sistala episode, another security breach took place in the NTRO. Arun Dixit, the centre director of the organisation’s atomic explosion division (AED), lost his laptop somewhere in Washington DC during an official trip to the US with the NTRO chairman. The laptop was crammed with top secret data on India’s intelligence on the nuclear weapons programmes of several countries, including Pakistan, China and North Korea. But like in Sistala’s case, the powerful lobby of defence scientists once again scuttled a thorough investigation. The leak was buried and kept out of the files. Dixit too escaped any scrutiny and still serves in the NTRO in the very same post.
Lost Laptops And Their ‘X’ Files

Place Delhi
Year 2006
Official Involved Ravind Sistala
Designation Centre Director (missile monitoring division)
Organisation National Technical Research Organisation
Incident Laptop goes missing from his car

Secret Data Lost

Presentations on Indian efforts to monitor missiles of neighboring countries
Details on the capabilities of the nuclear delivery systems of Pakistan and China
Response options available to India’s nuclear forces (Strategic Forces Command)
Deployment of radars to counter incoming missiles
Vulnerable points in India’s air defence network
Action taken None. Laptop not recovered. Official transferred to DRDO in a more sensitive position.

***

Place Washington DC
Year 2008
Official Involved Arun Dixit
Designation Centre Director (atomic devices division)
Organisation NTRO

Secret Data Lost

Defence nuclear programmes of neighbouring countries
Nuclear proliferation in Asia
Dirty bombs being made in neighbouring countries
Action taken None. Laptop not recovered. After probe, errant official retained in the same organisation.

***

Place Delhi
Year 2003
Organisation Defence Research and Development Organisation
Incident 53 computers go missing; later found with hard disks removed

Secret Data Lost

Secret coding of all communication used by the Intelligence Bureau (IB), Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), the defence forces, and the paramilitary forces, including Border Security Force
Logs of intercepted Pakistani communications
Action taken Case still unsolved. None of the hard disks have been recovered. DRDO has practically closed the case.

Sistala and Dixit clearly violated OSA, but escaped. They were also liable to 14 years’ imprisonment.

The NTRO was set up in the summer of ’03. A year earlier, a Group of Ministers had handpicked RAW special secretary R.S. Bedi to set up the new intelligence outfit. Bedi started the process by setting up an office in room no. 326, Sardar Patel Bhavan, in the heart of Delhi, on March 29, 2003. The organisation was formally notified in July.

Set up to plug gaps in India’s security establishment post the Kargil debacle, the NTRO’s charter eventually went much beyond the mere act of gathering intelligence. It became a key element within the security apparatus, hitting headlines recently when Outlook reported its ability to pluck GSM phone calls off the air. Bedi had served in RAW’s Aviation Research Centre, which monitored the missile and atomic programmes of neighbours. NTRO took on this responsibility after it came into being.

NTRO’s task thus was to monitor and gather intelligence on all missile programmes in the region and convey the data in real time to the Strategic Forces Command (SFC), a special military organisation that mans India’s nuclear arsenal and would deploy it in the event of a nuclear war. The SFC would also, based on NTRO data, periodically review and upgrade its positioning of nuclear missiles, and coordinate with the defence forces in launching a counter-strike against any nuclear threat.

This called for a credible linkage between a vast and intricate network of ground-based radars, satellites, secret command codes and SFC’s nuclear arsenal. NTRO’s missile monitoring division established these linkages and set up an early warning network for the SFC. Sistala had a key role in creating these linkages and as such had access to the most sensitive data on India’s capabilities, response time and secret codes. Naturally enough, all these details were part of the presentations, notes, documents, files and folders—all marked ‘Top Secret’—he had on the laptop he was given by the NTRO. Standard rules mandate that a laptop given by the organisation cannot be taken home or used to connect to the Internet. But these being early days for NTRO, Sistala was travelling around the country making presentations to security officials, beginning with then NSA M.K. Narayanan to the three service chiefs, the SFC commander, the intelligence chiefs and other top DRDO scientists who were to work on the technological aspects of the project.
This is the time his laptop went missing. Shockingly, NTRO buried the episode in no time. A preliminary inquiry was ordered to be carried out by Brigadier Anil Malhotra, its counter-intelligence official, but it was quickly wound up. By this time, Bedi had retired from NTRO. A powerful lobby of defence scientists, led by R. Chidambaram, the principal scientific advisor to the government, had already determined his successor: DRDO scientist K.V.S.S. Prasad Rao. Rao had no previous experience in intelligence but he had served as the staff officer to Chidambaram for several years. Sistala, also from the DRDO, got a much-needed reprieve from the ongoing inquiry. He continued with the missile monitoring division for two more years before returning to the DRDO to work on air defence radars.

Outlook’s attempts to elicit an official comment from NTRO via a detailed questionnaire sent a week before going to print met with silence. Phone calls and text messages to NTRO chairman Prasad Rao, its advisor P.V. Kumar, Sistala and Dixit evoked no response either. DRDO, in a cryptic response to an Outlook query, said it wasn’t aware of any lapses by Sistala at NTRO.

Such security breaches are nothing new for the clique that still lords it over DRDO and NTRO. In Oct ’03, 53 computers were stolen one night from two DRDO labs—the Systems Analysis Group and the Institute for Systems Analysis and Studies—in Metcalfe House in Delhi. The computer carcasses were found later, but the hard disks had been removed. They contained secret encryption codes and communications of the army, navy, air force and all central police organisations. Till date, no DRDO scientist has been blamed. Many have even been promoted. A police investigation made no headway, while an internal inquiry remains alive on paper even though many of its members have retired.

It’s also ironical that while many other officials have been prosecuted under the Official Secrets Act (OSA) on flimsy and concocted cases (see following story), Sistala and Dixit have escaped, despite being in clear violation of the OSA. In fact, since the leaks were related to India’s nuclear defence as well as secret codes, they could easily have attracted a penalty of 14 years’ imprisonment. Instead, the duo has continued in their careers. Should India’s intelligence agencies really be allowed to operate without even a modicum of accountability?

 

Drdo

Bangalore: DRDO bleeds as scientists desert organisation in droves

1 Comment

Monday, 24 February 2014 – 7:32pm IST | Place: Bangalore | Agency: DNA

DNA Correspondent

Young scientists are leaving India’s premier defence research agency in large numbers.

Defence Research Development Organisation (Drdo), responsible for developing indigenous defence systems, has not been able to retain its young scientists over the last seven years or so.

Close to 1,000 scientists have resigned from Drdo since 2007, but it is the exit of young scientists (Scientist ‘B’ and Scientist ‘C’ grades) that is a cause of concern.

The scientists in these grades are critical for research and development of a number of indigenous defence projects in areas such as aeronautics, armaments, combat vehicles, electronics and missiles.

Between 2007 and 2009, around 285 scientists in ‘B’ grade and 162 in ‘C’ resigned. Over the next four years, between 2010 and 2013, there was a small drop as 162 in grade ‘B’ and 77 in ‘C’ resigned.

The flight of the younger scientists is in complete contrast to the resignation to the senior scientists in ‘D’, ‘E’, ‘F’ ‘G’ ‘Outstanding’ ‘Distinguished’ categories, as between 2007 and 2013 only 86 resigned.

Following the high attrition rate in 2012, mainly due to availability better opportunities and incentives in the private sector, the ministry of defence (MoD) announced a few incentives and corrective measures to retain scientists.

The measures included two additional increments on promotion to each Grade, up to six variable increments on promotion granted on fast track, professional update allowance to all scientists, fast track promotions through assessments, opportunity to acquire higher qualifications at reputed institutes viz. IIT`s / IISc, etc. as Drdo sponsored candidate, young Scientists, Scientist of the Year and other Drdo awards in recognition to their contributions and creation of excellent infrastructure facilities at work places and residential complexes.

The incentives, however, have not been able to stop the exodus. Defence minister AK Antony said in Parliament recently that ‘personal and for pursuing higher studies’ as the reason for the scientists leaving the organisation.

Drdo has a sanctioned strength of 7,500 and is currently short of a few hundred scientists.

Drdo

Ex-DRDO technical officer’s son held for murdering scientist’s wife

Leave a comment

Bangalore, mar 11, 2014, DHNS : Deccan Herald
Financial gain motive; suspect ‘blackmailed’ victim with her fake suicide note
The son of a retired technical officer of the Defence Research and Development Organisation has been arrested on the charge of murdering the wife of a scientist for financial gain at the DRDO quarters in Baiyappanahalli here on Monday. The suspect had also “blackmailed” the victim with her fake suicide note.

Vijayan R, 33, was arrested from his Horamavu house about six hours after he allegedly slit the throat of Rajani Rajbala, 46, and snatched her gold chains, Police Commissioner Raghavendra Auradkar told reporters here on Tuesday.

Vijayan’s father was a technical officer at the Gas Turbine Research Establishment and the family lived in the DRDO quarters, Phase I, CV Raman Nagar, until his retirement. Since Rajbala and her husband Amrith Pakyadas also lived on the same campus, the suspect befriended the family which hails from Nagercoil, Tamil Nadu.
Huge loans

Vijayan, a school dropout who had been working with a non-profit organisation, was unable to repay the huge loans he had taken.

Even his debit-cum-credit card had been deactivated and he needed Rs 10,000 to reactivate it. An urgent need for money thus drew him to murder Rajbala, G B Manjunath, ACP (Ulsoor subdivision), told Deccan Herald. The suspect thought of “extorting” money from Rajbala.

He met her recently at her D-22 flat and claimed he was planning to make a documentary on the love story of a couple. But the female protagonist commits suicide following differences with her husband, Vijayan reportedly told Rajbala and coaxed her into believing that he needed a suicide letter in Tamil to be used in the documentary.

He then requested her to write the suicide letter as he does not know the language. Rajbala believed him, wrote the letter and gave it to him. Vijayan, however, started blackmailing her with the letter and even threatened to murder her if she did not give him money.

“He entered Rajbala’s house around 11 am. After a brief conversation, he demanded money but she refused. In a fit of rage, he then slit her throat twice with a knife in the bedroom.
Leaving her almost dead, he snatched the two gold chains on her person,” said Baiyyappanahalli Police Inspector K V Srinivas.

A neighbour rang the door bell just when Vijayan was allegedly slitting Rajbala’s throat. The suspect hurriedly pocketed the gold chains, jumped to the second floor from the balcony and fled.

Key, a dead give-away

He suffered a fracture in his leg and also injured his spine. While jumping down, he lost the key of his motorcycle which later gave away his identity. He managed to sneak out of the DRDO campus, hired an autorickshaw and reached his house, the police inspector added.