डीआरडीओ में नीति का दिवालियापन – कृत्रिम संकट पैदा करने के लिए प्रचार
To 28th May 2014
Sh. Narendra Modi,
Prime Minister,
Room No – 152, PMO,
South Block, NEW DELHI -110011
With 64 Crores annual budget in 1980, when Dr. V S Arunachalam took over as Scientific Adviser, the budget allocation enhanced to 1100 crores with missions made to develop missiles under IGMDP program.
That was the beginning of infrastructure development and deteriorating of scientific research and development. By March every year i.e. the closer of financial year, everyone from Scientist ’B’ to SA to RM office were looking for procurement cases only and those who met the expenditure by any means were rewarded with scientist of the year award.
However the conscious financial officers use to raise objections, so special provisions were made and duly approved by ministry. SA to RM was given special powers to procure under single quotation more than Rs. 10 lakh where procurement committee could be bypassed. This decision was taken to facilitate the speedy development of technology for missiles.
The incumbent after Kalam, further modified the single tender purchase and the SA office granted permission for procurement of one lakh rupees only.
The cases were raised left and right on single tender procurements, where hefty sums were returned to indenter as kickback. This procedure became a culture of DRDO and when in 2006 DRDO Purchase Manual was introduce and policy was framed, Directors powers were raised to 50 Lakhs rupees with Hqrs. rep in crores and SA’s power raised up to 50 crores.
When previous Defence Minister Sh. A K Antony noticed the foul smell, he ordered CGDA for special audit of DRDO. CGDA found that DRDO Directors including Scientific Adviser misused the funds by splitting procurement orders within their limit of sanction power. They fooled the country in all possible ways. A well known fact is that 70% of DRDO requirements come from foreign countries; it means that DRDO is wasting precious foreign currency which is hard earned by the country.
DRDO procured, in last 10 years, thousands of crores of rupees equipments and these equipments are lying idle in various Lab premises and waiting for their departure to the scrap house.
With the passage of time DRDO has become a dumping ground of obsolete technology and a way to needlessly waste the poor tax payers’ money without any end result.
Honorable Prime Minister is requested to overhaul the DRDO structure totally and take strong actions to implement Accountability.
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
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.
SistalaandDixitclearly violated OSA,butescaped. They were also liableto 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?
To,25thApril 2014Shri Syed Ekram Rizwi,Central Public Information Officer,Deputy Secretary, Prime Minister’s Office,South Block, New Delhi – 110011
Hello, Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in respect of my representation dated 16th April 2014 address to honorable Dr Man Mohan Singh, Prime Minister. The subject of letter was Unconstitutional act of DoPT officials who are managing the Online RTI Portal and supporting corrupt officers of DRDO.
1.Please provide the date of receipt of my representation dated 16th April 2014 address to honorable Dr Man Mohan Singh, Prime Minister.
2.Please provide the copy of noting/ remarks of PMO on my representation dated 16th April 2014 address to honorable Dr Man Mohan Singh, Prime Minister.
3.Please provide the present status of my representation dated 16th April 2014 address to honorable Dr Man Mohan Singh, Prime Minister.
To 16th April 2014Honorable Dr Man Mohan Singh,Prime Minister,PMO, North Block,New Delhi -110011
Subject: Unconstitutional act of DoPT officials who are managing the Online RTI Portal and supporting corrupt officers of DRDO
Honorable Sir,
I Prabhu Dandriyal, ex DRDO employee and resident of Dehradun, Uttarakhand fighting against corruption since 1999.
When the RTI Act 2005 implemented through our Honorable Parliament, it was a historical decision to empowerment common man of India.
Today, Sh Rahul Gandhi ji, Smt Sonia Gandhi ji daily quoting in election rallies that RTI Act 2005 is their gift to common man of India; it is 100% true that day one common man experiences his strength to correct the corrupt system and RTI Act helped mass common people of India.
Since its inception, I have filed several RTI applications to expose the corruption and slowly the corrective measures are taken by concern departments, but still long way to go on.
Sir, DoPT is the nodal agency for implementing RTI Act-2005 and I was found some officials from DoPT are supporting corrupt officials of DRDO.
Sir, I filed an online RTI application to DRDO for request information in respect of Dr. AK Singh, DOP, DRDO, Ministry of Defence. The information can expose the wrong doings of DRDO officials. But my RTI application was returned by DoPT official unprecedentedly.
My RTI application MODEF/R/2014/60617 filed online portal on 31/03/214 addressed to Dr. RB Sharma, CPIO, DRDO under department of Defence was returned online on 15th March 2014 with this remark which one is unprecedented act of portal manager/ in-charge against the guideline. Remarks :- You have filed more than 40 online RTI applications relating to DRDO on the address of Department of Defence which has been physically transferred to DRDO under intimation to you. DRDO is a separate public authority and is also placed under Second Schedule of the RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, your online RTI applications seeking information in r/o the DRDO and sent to Department of Defence will not be acted upon henceforth. You may directly send your application to the DRDO for the information.
As per Guideline – An applicant who desires to obtain any information under the RTI Act 2005 can make a request through this RTI Online Portal to only the Central Public Authorities of main Ministries/Departments located at New Delhi initially. In the first phase, this facility is available to Ministries/Departments/Apex Bodies mentioned in the list available in ‘GUIDELINES’
It is astonishing fact that DoPT official mentioning that DRDO placed under Second Schedule of the RTI Act, 2005 but they forget they are not exempted for corruption and human right violation matters; it seems that the officials involved are biased and supporter of corrupt official of DRDO.
I request you kindly take appropriate corrective measure take action against officials who are involved in unconstitutional act and give strength to claim of UPA government that RTI- Act 2005 is really empowered the common man and fix those who are diluting the effectiveness of strong RTI Act -2005.
Enclosed: Copy of my RTI application returned with remark by DoPT officials.
Final Status of MODEF/R/2014/60617
Top of Form
Applicant Name
Prabhu Dandriyal
Date of receipt
31/03/2014
Request Filed With
Department of Defence
Text of Application
To, 31st March 2014
Dr. RB Sharma, CPIO
DRDO HQ, Min. of Defence
DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg
New Delhi-110011Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in respect of Dr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Scientist G is presently holding the charge of DOP, DRDO at DRDO HQ. He is holding following post in DRDO since January 2007. Details are given as under:
SN Post Duration Directorate
1.Staff Officer to CC(R&D) (HR) -Oct 2004- Dec 2006DRDO HQ, DRDO,
2.DirectorJan 2007 Sep 2010CEPTAM, DRDO,
3.DirectorOct 2010 27th Feb 2013Dte. of HRD, DRDO HQ,
4.Director28 Feb 2013 till date DOP, DRDO HQ
Note: He was holding the charge of two Directorates as Director, DHRD & Director, DOP from 01 Dec 2012 to 27 Feb 2013
In reference to the above kindly provide the following information under RTI Act 2005.
1.Procedure/Guidelines/Rules for appointment of Directors in Corporate Directorate/RAC/CEPTAM, DRDO duly approved by DOPT, Government of India.
2.Criteria for appointment of Directors in Corporate Directorate/RAC/CEPTAM (Seniority/Administrative & Management skill, qualification & experience etc.)
3.Charter of Duties & Nature of work carried out by Scientist appointed as:
I.Staff Officer to Chief Controller R&D(HR)
II.Director, CEPTAM
III.Director, DHRD
IV.Director, DOP
4.File noting for appointment of Dr. Ajay Kumar Singh as Staff Officer to CCR&D (HR) & copy of appointment order
5.File noting for appointment of Dr. Ajay Kumar Singh as Director, CEPTAM & copy of his appointment order
6.File noting for appointment of Dr. Ajay Kumar Singh as Director, DHRD, DRDO HQ & copy of his appointment order
7.File noting for appointment of Dr. Ajay Kumar Singh as Director, DOP & copy of his appointment order
8.List of Scientist consider in the appointment of following post by DRDO Hqrs.
a.Director, CEPTAM Jan 2007- Sept 2010
b.Director, DHRD Oct 2010- Feb 2013
c.Director, DOP March 2013- Jan 2014
9.Administrative & Managerial Experience and Educational Qualification of Dr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Scientist F as on Jan 2007 when he was appointed as Director, CEPTAM, DRDO.
NOTE – Matter is directly related to corruption and not exempted under Section 24 (1) because Dr. Ajay Kumar Singh as Director, DHRD was part & parcel of implementing interview in promotion of scientist F to scientist G grade without proper amendment in SRO (Violation of Article 309). He was also one of the candidates for scientist F to scientist G promotion in year 2011 assessment.
a.Please refer CIC decision in File No. CIC/LS/A/2012/002612 dated 22.3.2013 (Dr. Neelam Bhalla Vs. DRDO)-
b.Information asked is on Establishment Matter and not exempted u/s 24 of RTI Act as per various decisions of CIC.
Regards
Prabhu Dandriyal,
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun -248008
0135- 2787750, 9411114879,
Request document (if any)
document not provided
Status
RTI REQUEST APPLICATION RETURNED TO APPLICANT
Date of Action
15/04/2014
Remarks
Remarks :- You have filed more than 40 online RTI applications relating to DRDO on the address of Department of Defence which has been physically transferred to DRDO under intimation to you. DRDO is a separate public authority and is also placed under Second Schedule of the RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, your online RTI applications seeking information in r/o the DRDO and sent to Department of Defence will not be acted upon henceforth. You may directly send your application to the DRDO for the information.
To 20th December 2013Honorable Defence MinisterRoom No – 104, South BlockNew Delhi-110011
SATYAMEV JAYATE Jai Ho Jai Ho Jai Ho
Honorable defence Minister of India on 29th October 2013 ordered CBI inquiry against the corrupt top DRDO officials.
“Also ordered and recommended replacement of Recruitment & Assessment Centre ( RAC) by suitable agency like UPSC”
I congratulate all the honest and innocent workforce of DRDO, who did noticed the misadventures of DRDO Hqrs & Directors of lab and informed the Honorable Defence Minister/ Honorable President of India through registered complaints. These corrupt officials used to write their own constitutions such that they can misinterpret the government laid down rules and misappropriate the government funds for their own benefits, under the shadow of secrecy and OSA 1923, and they swallowed their ugly acts.
God gave me courage to fight against the corrupt officials of DRDO. I have begun this journey just after “KARGIL WAR”. DRDO did consumed thousand & thousand crores, did not delivered any significant product which can utilize in “KARGIL WAR” and then General Malik uttered “casualties in the conflict could have been reduced had the Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) “not come in the way”
“It has taken fifteen years to convince the government of India about involvement of DRDO officials/ Directors in neck deep corruption.”
On 28th October 2013 Defence Secretary Sh R K Mathur put up note to Defence Minister with proof of involvement in recruitment of scientists unfairly with manipulation and hiding facts while investigation, trying to close three times the investigation with wrong feedbacks by following top DRDO officials.
Four Recruitment Cases of Mrs T Chandrabanu, Scientist ‘F’, Mrs S Geetha, Scientist ‘C’, Ms Swati Srivastva, Scientist ‘C’ Ms Dolly Bansal, Scientist ‘C’
Civilian Padma Awardee 2003, Former Scientific Advisor to Defence Minister, DG-DRDO 2004-2008
Civilian Padma Awardee 1998 & 2013, Former Scientific Advisor to Defence Minister, DG-DRDO 2008-May 2013, Chairman of The Aeronautical Society of India Hyderabad Branch, President, C.R.Rao Advanced Institute of Mathematics, Statistics and Computer Science (AIMSCS)
Former Distinguished Scientist & Chief Controller – R&D (LS & IC),DRDO , President – Amity Science, Technology and Innovation Foundation, DRDO Technology Leadership Awardee (2010), Scientists of the year Awardee 1989, President – Federation of Indian Physiological Societies Father of Ms S Geetha
The then Distinguished Scientist, CC R&D (NS M & HR)
Ex- Director of Personal, Scientist ’H’, Outstanding Scientist, Suspended just two hours before retirement from service. Scientists of the year Awardee 2007, Father of Ms Swati Srivastav
Ex-Director, DTRL, DRDO retired in May 2013, Best Techno Managerial Services/Popular Science Communication Award 2011
Ex- Additional Director, RAC, DRDO, Father of Ms Dolly Bansal
Ex- Director of Personal, Scientist ‘G’ Scientist of the Year Award – 2003, Ex-Director, Dte of Life Sciences, DRDO HQrs (2002) DRDO, the recipient of Vijnana Rathna jointly awarded by National Centre for Science & Technology Communication, New Delhi and Science Centre, Gwalior in 1991
Ex-Director, DIPAS, DRDO (appointed Director(DIPAS), Delhi, wef 26 April 2002) winner of HH Loescheke Research Prize in Techniques/ Instrumentation- 2002, Maj Gen SL Bhatia Oration Awardee 2006,HH Loescheke Research Prize in Techniques/ Instrumentation- 2002
the then Director, RAC, DRDO 2004, Ex Director, PEACE , 10 May 2001-15 July 2003, was awardee the DRDO Technology Award-1995
A very strong recommendation from Honorable Defence Minister highlights the incompetence of existing Recruitment & Assessment Centre ( RAC). Honorable Defence Minister recommended the replacement of RAc by suitable recruitment agency like UPSC from financial year 2014-15.
CBI inquiry is big blow for DRDO having lakhs crores infrastructure, having more than 30000 strong scientific / technical work forces, having 52 labs across the country.
Some of the above top ex DRDO officials’ calls on to Honorable Defence Minister to convince their innocence during last to last week and expressed that CBI inquiry may stop further research work in DRDO. Honorable Defence Minister very well knew that in the last 30-40 years of their scientific carrier what are their ground contribution because DRDO measurably failed to deliver any significant product in our last “KARGIL WAR”. They forgot that before them or after them whatever DRDO achieved or achieving that is because of honest people work force not by their corrupt / nepotism /incompetent group.
DRDO directors demonstrated their incompetency several times but they manage major share in defence budget every year. They do not deserve single penny until unless they are able to develop an import substitute.
With fake degree’s the manpower were selected as charge-man/ technical assistant and become scientist’H’ outstanding scientist, distinguished scientists by purchasing degree from private institutions, deemed universities and also manipulating by DIAT itself, crores of crores rupees were distributed by DRDO every years in the name of scientific development but now by CGDA audit also revealed that this money is routing through private institutes and deemed universities. It also confirmed facts that if any one check DRDO’s M Tech/PhD’s/ honorable degrees then will found that the money connection and degrees allotments like reveri’s by private universities and deemed universities etc. And unfortunately this mechanism also starts following in government intuitions in the name of resource development.
The incompetence of DRDO directors have been observed and felt by services Hqrs. Since inception of DRDO till 1990, DRDO used to work very closely on General staff requirement and Generals were closely monitoring day to day developments of DRDO. But when DRDO started “working on major programs” without prior knowledge of basic science &technology gave assured commitment for product development which never saw the light of the day.
The time has come for sincere and honest efforts by scientific community for an end result/ product development.
Honorable Defence Minister is requested to thoroughly investigatethe DRDO procurement policy which has made the scientist a mere suppliers. Every director of 52 Labs has fake companies or associations with suppliers. Investigation will reveal that incompetent suppliers who are in touch with DRDO director beside his knowledge base, if he is rice exporter/ simple computer peripheral sellers /simple traders, he can sell any high-tech missile parts/ high tech laser components / high end software’s or anything which required by DRDO scientists in national interest or strategic applications. Dilemma these high tech information is shared by these incompetent suppliers with their families in kitchen and dining table. This is only for money matter nothing else no national interest, no values, no moral. In last 10 years honorable defence minister and national security adviser also received n numbers of anonymous letter but having truth and IB also gave confirmation reports.
Sir, how can you imagine wonders from this mind set the lab directors of DRDO ? Absolute power, Absolute corruption.
Government of India, Ministry of Defence should reconsider the appointment of Scientific Adviser to RM as it was done through search committee before 1984. A person with a moral values /strong scientific knowledge base known across the globe/ technical leadership/ technology contributions like Dr. Daulat Singh Kothari, Prof. Suri Bhagavantham, Dr. Basanti Dulal Nagchaudhur I, Dr. Raja Rammana, etc.
The selection of Scientific Adviser in house the incompetent manpower has damaged the scientific temperament. The current environment / work culture there are no special or outside observation encouragement for innovation, creativity, scientific achievements, etc, only incompetent/ yes man/ are encouraged. Today in DRDO no transparency in recruitments / promotions /procurements is observed, every lab facing nepotism/ yes man culture.
Sir, I want to congratulate you for taking such strong decision and giving signal to all corrupt official of DRDO, in spite of big lobbyist ex – DG, SA to RM who have good connection in PMO.
The decision is timely, well awaited Lokpal has passed honorably from both the houses and Lokpal recommends appropriate punishment for corrupt officials, “They will get their due”
SUNDAY, 18 MARCH 2012 00:27 J GOPIKRISHNAN | NEW DELHI
While the Prime Minister’s Office and the National Security Advisor are trying to hush up the wrongdoings by powerful technical intelligence agency, NTRO, by not tabling the CAG report in Parliament, the CAG response to an RTI query confirms blatant violations in purchase and recruitments in the sensitive organisation.
The CAG submitted its report to the President in mid-February 2011. As per tradition, this should have been tabled in Parliament in the next session. But the Government has not mustered the courage to table it even after more than a year.
The Government may attract breach of privilege notices from parliamentarians as it is going to submit the report to the Supreme Court on March 19. All the CAG reports are first placed in Parliament, which makes it public.
This will be the first time the Government will bypass Parliament and submit a CAG report to the Supreme Court. The SC had ordered for production of the controversial CAG report in a sealed cover on a petition filed by former joint secretary of National Technical Research Organisation VK Mittal.
“We have noticed lack of transparency and non-compliance of rules and procedures in procurement of systems/stores/equipment and deficient procurement management resulting in cases of excess payment/wasteful expenditure/loss to exchequer,” said the CAG’s office in the RTI reply sought by whistleblower VK Mittal.
“We have noticed cases of appointment of ineligible candidates and lack of transparency in recruitment of regular employees also in NTRO…. We have noticed lack of transparency in appointment of contractual employees… We have noticed instances of misuse of official position,” added CAG’s office.
CAG decision to audit on NTRO affairs in December 2009 was vehemently objected by then National Security Advisor MK Naryanan and later overruled by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. NTRO, which was formed after the Kargil war, works under NSA who reports to the Prime Minister.
The CAG submitted its performance audit on the NTRO, the first such audit report on an intelligence organisation in mid-February 2011. The report, according to sources, exposed the style of functioning and rampant corruption in secret service organisation, nepotism and siphoning money in the name of national security. The findings of the CAG were pointing directly towards the “arbitrary decisions” of then NSA and higher officials in the PMO, said sources.
Among the major findings, the blatant violation of UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) purchases by manipulating the decisions of Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS). The CAG report, a copy of which is also with National Security Advisor Shiv Shankar Menon over the past one year, has indicted former NTRO Chairman KVSS Prasad Rao and its Advisor MS Vijayaraghavan for misdeeds in several purchases.
The CAG’s Special Audit on Performance and Finance of NTRO has revealed that the agency, in a bid to favour the Israeli vendors, never informed the CCS on adding extra cost of Rs 150 crore. The CCS sanctioned Rs 300 crore for purchase and NTRO manipulated the accounting procedures and hiked the purchase amount to Rs 450 crore.
More over CAG found that the entire such purchase to favour the Israeli vendor lead to inferior quality and the entire UAVs are still non-operational.
The CAG in its report on the functioning of NTRO found that as many as 143 posts in the sensitive organisation were filled not according the procedures and observed severe nepotism in such postings. The CAG decided to audit when Mittal, who quit from the organisation and complained on illegalities.
After Government hushed up the CAG report by not tabling before Parliament, he approached Supreme Court through noted lawyer Prashant Bhushan. In a recent hearing, Justices HL Dattu and CK Prasad directed Solicitor General Rohinton Nariman to submit the controversial CAG report on March 19 in a sealed cover. Several legal experts point out that non-tabling of CAG report before Parliament and presenting it in a sealed cover before court may invite breach of privilege by Parliamentarians.
29th January 2012ToThe Honorable Prime MinisterPMO, South BlockNew Delhi -110011
Honorable Sir,
“Truth Never Dies” ll Satyameva Jayate ll
A Powerful orator, economist of International repute, most reliable financial expert, trusted lieutenant of Smt. Indira Gandhi, Ex-governor of Reserve Bank & Ex-Chairman of Planning Commission- All these decoration warrant that at least PMO should not ignore the fight against corruption prevailing in DRDO. If the Prime Minister obliged the scientist with 20% incentive in a country where 40 crore people have to fight for at least one meal for survival. How come PMO helps DRDO to conceal the truth of the prevailing corruption?
I assure you Sir, the way the website www.corruptionindrdo.com has been targeted with fake cases with fake charges FIR registered with Police against whistle blower and Ministry of Defence has put all efforts to close their eyes against documentary evidences of corruption on DRDO is not a welcome sign of good governance.
This website mainly advocated the self reliance in front of defence technology. The huge one lakh crores infrastructure and 28000 strong competent scientists/engineers/technicians of DRDO in last 50 years have failed to deliver a single indigenous output of International standards.
This website has exposed the corruption, nepotism in DRDO and this neck deep corruption/nepotism is stumbling block in development.
The scientists/engineers are encouraged to justify the failures.
Nobody is talking about the success, about the projects/programs. When it will stop? Only time will tell.
DRDO is targeting those who give positive criticism for technology development.
Similar firm and thunderous decision is required in DRDO like ISRO.
This website represents the common people of India and expects the result of action taken on issues exposed with evidences and so far DRDO is ignorant of national perspective of development. Only goal is personal interest.
The accountability of DRDO is Zero
The Accountability is directly proportional to work output.
Therefore DRDO work output is Zero
Even the honorable parliament has been mislead by DRDO several times.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday asked for a copy of the Comptroller and Auditor General’s report pointing out alleged irregularities in the purchase of intelligence equipment byNational Technical Research Organisation(NTRO), which was set up in 2004 to provide critical data relating to threats to the nation.
Solicitor general R F Nariman assured a bench of Justices H L Dattu and C K Prasad that the government had already initiated action against erring officials on the basis of the CAG report but petitioner V K Mittal’s counsel Jayant Bhushan wondered why the Centre was shy of bringing the alleged irregularities into the open by placing the report in Parliament.
The bench asked Nariman to produce the CAG report on NTRO scam in a sealed cover by March 19. This is the second time within a year that the apex court has asked for a CAG report, the first being on the irregularities in the allotment of 2G spectrum and licences during A Raja’s tenure as telecom minister.
Nariman was belligerent in trashing Mittal’s PIL, not only accusing the latter of attempting to serve a personal interest but also alleging that his correspondence with the authorities revealing top secret projects with their location could help countries inimical to India.
Bhushan countered Nariman by alleging that the government was deliberately keeping the matter under wraps in the name of security to shield the culprits. But the bench said, “It is not a case where the government has put the issue in cold storage but promised that it was being looked into. We will not pass an order but request the SG to produce the CAG report in a sealed cover on March 19.”
Mittal had alleged that a major portion of the Rs 450 crore NTRO scam pertained to purchase of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) from an Israeli firm allegedly at a very high price without the mandatory approval of the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS).
NTRO, which functions under the Prime Minister’s Office, has been entrusted with the task of missile monitoring, satellite and airborne imagery, cyber patrolling and security, cyber offensive operations and communication support systems including cryptology.
It was on the complaint of Mittal, a former joint director in the government of India who had also served in NTRO, that the PMO had ordered a probe into the scam and later, CAG was asked to look into the organisation’s accounts. Nariman alleged that Mittal wanted to head the NTRO and filed the PIL when he did not succeed.
During the last hearing, Bhushan had alleged that Delhi High Court had dismissed Mittal’s writ petition on April 6, 2011 after the Centre filed a probe status report in sealed cover assuring prompt action against the guilty officials. However, no action was taken till date, he claimed.
Mittal’s petition stated that the independent body answerable only to the national security adviser was allotted approximately Rs 8,000 crore since 2005, but there was no accounting of the spending.
To 22th August 2011The Honorable Prime MinisterPMO, South BlockNew Delhi -110011
Subject: Grant of Extension of service of Scientists beyond the age of superannuation
Honorable Sir, Department of Personnel and Training O M No.26012/8/2011-Estt. (A) Dated the 16th May, 2011 stats that the laid down criteria for extension of service to the scientist should be in term of proviso to
i) FR 56 (d)
ii) Departmental Peer Review Committee (DPRCs) headed by the Secretary of the Scientific Departments are constituted by the DOP&T with the approval of Prime Minister for a term of 2 years to consider the cases of extension of service of scientists beyond 60 years and up to 62 years.
iii) Extension of service of eminent scientists of international stature
iv) Indicate whether this will block promotion opportunities of others in the Department
v) Will be processed further for approval of ACC through the office of the Establishment Officer
Sir, the above guidelines thoroughly overruled by DRDO establishment. When Dr APJ Kalam was granted extension of service he had the expertise and international recognition in his field (Missile Technology). Dr M Natrajan was granted extension on the basis of his work in MBT (Arjun Tank). Dr U R Rao, ISRO got extension because of his contribution in space technology.
DRDO, once Dr V K Atre became, SA to RM overruled the guidelines of DoPT provisions for extension. A new culture was established that is those scientists who were close to Dr Atre they were recommended for extension without justifying their contributions to science & technology. Afterwards the secretary of DRDO used this tool for those who are expert in misappropriation and manipulation of Government funds and misinterpretation of Government rules to their personal benefits.
These scientists nowhere stand as per guidelines of FR 56 (d) and you will find most of cases the scientists are involved totally in administrative job for years. Interestingly Secretary DRDO removed the required paras of Annexure FR 56 (d) where it states the justification why his service is needed and the details of contributions are thoroughly overruled.
Surprisingly, no one pointed these corrupt practices in the process of granting extension. Some applications which I have received by RTI from DoPT are enclosed for your ready reference. Which are the self explanatory, under the name of Defence research and under the shadow of official Secret Act 1923 and the bonafide possession of CCS Rules 1965 they have be-fooled the DoPT,PMO,ACC etc.
DRDO at an interval of every three months gives extension to at least 10-12 scientists, out of which not a single scientist deserve the recommendation as per guide lines of DoPT O M No.26012/8/2011-Estt. (A) Dated the 16th May, 2011 Normally DRDO Hqrs recommend extension to the (Service Provider) like Sh T Mohan Rao, Ex Director, GTRE (Massage Parlour Fame), DRDO recommend Dr S K Vasudeva of SPIC even beyond 64 years of age as he arranged the all cocktails parties + in 5* with help of CS Constructions etc and provide Mrs Kanimozhi‘s methods routing money through her daughter’s firm M/S M V- Grfix as IB already reported to PMO.
DRDO recommends the name of scientists/Directors who manage the misappropriation of funds of projects/ programs. As an example the case of Sh R C Aggarwal, Director, DEAL, Dehradun and Sh Iqbal Singh of IRDE, Dehradun Sh R C Aggarwal joined as Charge-man and become Director, DEAL as Scientist ‘G’ in 2007.
He has no international publications,No patents,No significant contribution in any projects at LRDE, NPOL, DLRL and DEAL where he was posted earlier
As a director he wrote an essay (cut paste copy technology) on Software Defined Radio and prepared a proposal for sanction having 60 sub contracts paras. This proposal opened up an avenue to distribute poor tax payer’s money. Rs 100 Crores sanctioned for SDR project and with few months he was promoted as Scientist ‘H’ and also got extension for two years and waiting Scientist for Director’s post Sh K N Rao of DEAL died with shock (Heart Attack).
Sh R C Aggarwal’s extension was recommended by Dr Arun Kumar, DOP, DRDO who was Scientist ‘E’ in 2001 when Sh R C Aggarwal was Scientist ‘F’. The DPRC which recommended Sh R C Aggarwal had a external member Dr P S Goel, Charman, RAC, whose contribution in ISRO as scientist is big zero, No international publications, No patents, only cut copy paste technology expertise.
Sh R C Aggarwal spent Rs 10 Lakh on TA/DA per year so he is able to contribute Rs 1.25 Lakhs per month in GPF account. As he is using Red beacon on his vehicle drawing Transport allowance using official driver in private car for fooling department.
Sh R C Aggarwal very bluntly says “the development of SDR will take 20 years time” and the PDC of SDR is 36 months.
Dr S C Jain who is enjoying extension but in the same time did not get the promotion to Scientist ‘H’, when he was not fit for promotion then how come he was recommended for extension in service, it can only happened in DRDO.
He has no international publications,No patents,No significant contribution in any projects at DEAL
But he is master in manipulation of government funds and misinterpretation of government rules in the interest of his boss. The reason he was benefited, was to get extension and job for his son who has fake qualification.
Sh Iqbal Singh Scientist ‘H’, IRDE, Dehradun got extension without justification of his scientific contribution.
He has no international publications,No patents,No significant contribution in any projects at IRDE
Only significant contribution is misappropriation of government funds, he gave orders to a firm where his son works
Dr S S Sundaram, Director, IRDE, Distinguished Scientist got extension for his golden achievement in project SAMYUKTA (Electronic Warfare), it is well known that Project SAMYUKTA started with Rs 250 Crores initial cost in May 1994 and when buried unceremoniously in 2006 it consumed Rs 6000 Crores of poor tax payer’s money.
Dr Arun Kumar, DOP, DRDO never did science and there is no question of scientific contribution. He is master in manipulation the governments rules and extend the path of favoritism to benefit DRDO’s top brasses wards. Appointment of his own daughter as scientist ‘B’ by violating all recruitment rules of DRDO. The enquiry is going on without any result like DRDO projects because the chairman of enquiry Dr Salwan, Ex DRDO scientist got Rs 80 Lakhs project with Rs 1 Lakh/month salary from Dr Arun Kumar itself.
The Honorable Prime Minister is requested to stop this criminal act of DRDO’s extension business, which they are recommending without justification. Please go through the recommended applications of DRDO scientists which I have received from DoPT through RTI.
Sir, this is the major reason of brain drain in DRDO because I am receiving lot of mails of ex DRDO young scientists from all over the world in my website www.corruptionindrdo.com, they share their experiences in this pathetic condition of DRDO.
Defence Minister, Room No 104- South Block, New Delhi- 110011
Shri Shashi Kant Sharma, Defence Secretary, Room !01- South Block, New Delhi – 110011
Ms. Alka Sirohi, Secretary (Personnel), Room No 112, North Block-110011
Dr V K Saraswat, D G (R&D), DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg, New Delhi=110105FR 56 (d) comparisonNo.26012/8/2011-Estt. (A)Government of IndiaMinistry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions(Department of Personnel and Training)North Block, New Delhi,Dated the 16th May, 2011
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Subject: Grant of Extension of service of Scientists beyond the age of superannuation – Issue of instructions regarding.
The undersigned is directed to refer to Department of Personnel & Taining O.M. No.26012/6/2002-Estt.(A) dated 9.12.2002 (copy enclosed) on the subject mentioned above laying down the criteria for considering cases of extension of service of Scientists in terms of proviso to FR 56(d) and to state that the guidelines for extension of service of eminent scientists of international stature beyond 62 years have been further reviewed as a need has been felt for a rigorous Peer group screening by an inter disciplinary Committee of experts.
2. Departmental Peer Review Committee (DPRCs) headed by the Secretary of the Scientific Departments are constituted by the DOP&T with the approval of Prime Minister for a term of 2 years to consider the cases of extension of service of scientists beyond 60 years and up to 62 years.
3. It has now been decided with the approval of Prime Minister that the existing/reconstituted Departmental Peer Review Committee shall also do the first stage screening of Scientists for their extension beyond 62 years of age and thereafter the DPRCs’ recommendations will be placed before the Committee under the Cabinet Secretary provided that the DPRCs’ have at least two outside experts apart from Secretary (Personnel & Training). The DPRCs must give detailed justification for such extension based on merits of the case; the international stature of the person recommended and also indicates whether this will block promotion opportunities of others in the Department. Such recommendations of the DPRCs for extension of service of Scientists beyond 62 years will be sent of the Establishment Division of the Department of Personnel & Training for placing the cases before the Committee under Cabinet Secretary. Only such cases recommended by the Committee under Cabinet Secretary will be processed further for approval of ACC through the office of the Establishment Officer. Cases of extension of service of Scientists beyond 60 years and up to 62 years recommended by DPRC will continue to be sent directly to the office of Establishment Officer in DOP&T as at present.
4. All proposals for extension of service of Scientists beyond 62 years in terms of the 3rd proviso to FR 56(d) may, therefore, be processed keeping in view the above guidelines in addition to the criteria stipulated in the OM dated 9.12.2010.
(P.Prabhakaran)Director (E)
DoPT RTI replyDoPT Reply for Sh R C Aggarwal Page 1DoPT Reply for Sh R C Aggarwal page 2DoPT Reply For Sh R C Aggarwal page 3DoPT Reply for Sh Iqbal Singh page 1DoPT Reply for Sh Iqbal Singh Page 2
To 6th June 2011The Defence MinisterRoom No -104, South BlockNew Delhi – 110011
Subject: Refer to your D.O No 2236 VIP/RM/2011 dated 20th May 2011
Honorable Sir,
Your reply to my letter 15th may 2011 has proved your greatness and deep concern about the prevailing corrupt activities in DRDO.
On 3rd June 2011 you have given a call to deliver AGNI-5 on the occasion of DRDO award ceremony. Some truth which has become de-motivation factor to young scientist who are hard working and dreamed to develop defence related systems are shattered. The reason is very simple since 1999 to motivate DRDO scientists, DRDO Hqrs has managed to distribute the funds (More than 1 crore) in the Annual Mela to those scientists whose contribution in science and technology development is nil. These awards are given to “yes man” on one subject to my knowledge and can be verified from DRDO Hqrs four people have received Scientist of the Year award without any contribution. As an example the gentleman who developed Satcom terminal was thrown out of DEAL,DRDO in 1991-92 and then Director received the Scientist of the Year award on Satcom technology, again on the same product while it was non functional in any of the defence specific mission but another Scientist of the Year award. Third time in 2004-05 again for same product Sh Ashok Sen received the award and now for the same product Sh RC Aggarwal & his team has given AGNI award.
The interesting fact is that this product was not used in either KARGIL WAR or deployed any where, but the work done by Dr E Bhagirathe Rao, Chanchal Kumar Chatterji has become a “Kamdhenu Cow” for above great – great scientist.
Brig Swaminathan , director finance was also one recipient of Scientist of the Year award for his contribution in managing funds in DRDO Hqrs
Sh I D Gaba Director RAC/ DOP was awarded Scientist of the Year award without any scientific contribution.
Even a scientist who has spend his life in managing conservancy casual staff, if he is a yes man, he is getting the Scientist of the Year award.
DRDO Hqrs can easily be fooled, the award committee and finally the honorable minister. Since Defence minister is simply endorsing without any query of the achievements of individual.
I have asked some citations of few awards recipients under purview of RTI Act 2005 as Padma awards citations and other details are also available for common people, but as usual DRDO used shelter of schedule –II of RTI Act and matter is under screening of CIC.
AWARDS ARE GIVEN TO MOTIVATE BUT IN DRDO THE AWARD HAS BEEN PROVED DEMOTIVATING FACTOR.
