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.
To 27th may 2014
Sh. Narendra Modi
Prime Minister
Room No – 152, PMO,
South Block, NEW DELHI -110011
Subject: The Appointment Committee of the Cabinet appointed Sh. Avinash Chander on contract basis.
With the passage of time the dignity of the office of Scientific Adviser to RM has taken a nose dive. Initially the organization (DRDO) was headed by eminent scholars and internationally recognized faces like Dr. D S Kothari, Dr. S Bhagavantam, Dr. B D Nagchaudhuri, Prof. M G K Menon, Dr. Raja Ramanna and Dr. V S Arunachalam whose scientific contribution were know across the globe.
Unfortunately when the honorary post of the Scientific Adviser to RM was converted to DG, DRDO and Secretary DRD, the takers of the plum post were apolitical. The search committee used to recommend a person with established credentials as the individual would lead 30000 strong scientific/technical workforces and was supposed to deliver products for three defence forces.
The KARGIL War however exposed the credit of DRDO as countrymen were ditched. The justification of successive failures was given as the non-availability of imported critical systems/subsystems, components, etc.
Later, the top offices gave a new theory of system integration instead of developing indigenous systems/subsystems as import substitutes. The successive government was not in a position to analyze properly the role of DRDO and the fallout was that a vacuum was created in the chain of command.
As far as the expenditure is concerned, the office of Scientific Adviser’s focus shifted to infrastructure development (primarily acquiring land, expansion of building and dumping of equipment) instead of research and development of systems.
DRDO consumes Rs. 10000 crores annually.
The scientific community down the channel are preparing justification for annual expenditure and in the absence of ACCOUNTABILITY they simply burry the product in the name of technology demonstration with obsolete technology imported from elsewhere.
When Dr. V K Saraswat, Ex-SA to RM was due to retire after successive extensions. The search committee was ignorant to the requirement of SA to RM’s office and new incumbent Sh. Avinash Chander was selected by ACC out of the 12 officers without having any credential to their account even on national level.
The information revealed under RTI is enclosed for your ready reference.
Honorable Sir, after sixty six years of independence, for first time people of India have given such a great and unprecedented mandate based on your commitment, patriotism and providing avenues for betterment of the country.
The previous government, even after being in office for two successive terms, had failed to implement ACCOUNTABILITY in DRDO. DRDO with passage of time has reduced to a mere organization where the workforce is provided hefty salaries as social commitments.
We hope that DRDO will overhaul thoroughly and with ACCOUNTABILITY enforced, turn into a productive organization.
Currently, DRDO has a large number of scientists in service extensions 60 to 62 and 62 to 64 and the astonishing fact is that maximum are involved in non-scientific activities.
Early address to this “extension business” and “Contract Business” will help to curb the neck deep corruption in DRDO.
It is really strange that in 125 crore families, we have not been able to find the right eligible person and have ended up relying upon contract culture.
To,
Central Public Information Officer
Terminal Ballistics Research Laboratory (TBRL), DRDO
Min of Defence
Sector 30
Chandigarh – 160003
Hello,
Kindly refer to following decisions of Central Information Commission and verdict given thereof in these decisions.
File No. CIC/LS/A/2012/002612 dated 22.3.2013 (Dr. Neelam Bhalla vs. DRDO) Verdict – “It is, no doubt, true that DRDO is an exempted organisation; yet it has been the consistent view of this Commission that the benefit of exemption extends only to functional / operational matters and not to establishment related routine matters. The legality of this view has not been challenged in the relevant judicial forum so far”.
CIC/LS/A/2010/000107 dated 26.4.2010 (Ms. K. Surya Kumari Vs DRDO), CIC/SM/C/2008/00054/LS dated 29.01.2010 (Shri Prabhat Vs DRDO) and CIC/LS/A/2012/002487 dated 31.12.2012 ( Ms. Savitha Vs DRDO)
In its various decisions CIC consistently held that Establishment Matters relating to the organization notified u/s 24 of the RTI Act come within the purview of the Act and information in this regard thereto are not exempted from disclosure.
In light of the above decisions of CIC,Kindly provide the following information under Section 6(1) of RTI Act 2005.
INFORMATION SOUGHT
Whether Mr. Suresh Chand, Chief Admin Officer (CAO) was an employee of TBRL, Chandigarh. (Yes/No)
If answer to point (1) is yes then provide the following information.
i. The date on which Mr. Suresh Chand was retired from TBRL.
ii. Whether a lady other than his wife claimed on his retirement pensionery benefits on the day of his retirement.(Yes/No)
iii. Whether pension of Mr. Suresh Chand was withhold.(Yes/No)
iv. If answer to point (iii) is yes then provide the reasons for withholding of his pension.
v. Was the case of withholding of his pension and reasons thereof was referred to DRDO HQ/Vigilance for inquiry?(Yes/No)
vi. If answer to point (v) is yes then what is the status of his pension and retirement benefits?
vii. Whether his pension & retirement benefits has been restored partially after inquiry/ non enquiry. (Yes/No)
viii Whether Director, TBRL refer the case of Mr. Suresh Chand to CVC besides DGR&D, DRDO for information under new Transparency Law of Govt of India.(Yes/No)
3. Please refer to Rule 21 of The Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964: RESTRICTION REGARDING MARRIAGE and GOI MHA OM No. 219/51-Ests. Dated 16.02.1955: Procedure for dealing with requests from Government servants for permission to remarry while first wife is still living, provide following information. i. Whether TBRL/DRDO received any request from Mr. Suresh Chand, CAO regarding permission to remarry while first wife is still living. (Yes/No)
ii. If answer to point (i) above is yes then due procedure as per Rule 21 has been followed by Competent Authority in the matter. (Yes/No)
The information sought in this RTI Application is on Establishment Matter and as such not exempted u/s 24 of the RTI Act.
To Date 20th November 2013 The CPIO, DRDO HQ Room No. 314A DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg New Delhi – 110105
Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in respect of Amity University, Uttar Pradesh, Private University establish by an act of state legislature of Uttar Pradesh
1.Please provide total amount of funds granted to Amity University, Uttar Pradesh, Private University by DRDO Labs since April 2008 to March 2013 for various purposes.
2.Name of scientists of DRDO who enroll for PhD since April 2008 to March 2013.
3. Name of scientists of DRDO who joined Amity University if available with DRDO Hqrs
Kindly refer to following decisions of Central Information Commission and verdict given in these decisions.
File No. CIC/LS/A/2012/002612 dated 22.3.2013 (Dr. Neelam Bhalla vs. DRDO) Verdict – It is, no doubt, true that DRDO is an exempted organisation yet it has been the consistent view of this Commission that the benefit of exemption extends only to functional / operational matters and not to establishment related routine matters. The legality of this view has not been challenged in the relevant judicial forum so far.
Note: – above required information is directly related to corruption and not come under schedule II. As you aware Dr W Selvamurthy (Dr in YOGA from Private Institute) has joined Amity Group as President, Amity Science, Technology and Innovation Foundation (ASTIF) and Chair professor, Life Sciences without obtaining the required NOC from government of India. Recently Defence Minister recommends CBI inquiry against top DRDO officials and Dr W Selvamurthy is one of them.
To 2nd August 2013 Shri R K GIRDHARUnder Secretary RTI Section, Room No 215 A /II North Block, New Delhi
Subject: Fooling the RTI applicant by DRDO with help of DoPT
Sir,
I have send a RTI request CPIO,Under Secretary (Estt.A-IV) R.No.202, North Block, D/o.Personnel & Training, North Block, New Delhi on 23rd July 2013. (Copy enclosed for your ready reference.)
I have received a letter from Sh B Bandyopadhyay, Under Secretary, & CPIO, vide letter No 28034/265/2013-Estt.(A) dated 29th July 2013 stated that my application forwarded to CPIO,DRDO Hqrs for providing information directly to me. Copy enclosed)
Subsequently vide letter no RTI/01/2091/P/2013/0210 DRDO Hqrs CPIO, Dr.A.K.Tyagi, Sc’F’ refused to disclose this information u/s 24 (1) of the RTI Act.
In view of above I would like to inform you some facts for your kind perusal.
In 11th July 2011 I had requested similar RTI request to DoPT and received proper information from Sh Mohd. Moniruazzaman, CPIO vide letter F.No 29/41/2011/EO(SM-II) date 2nd August 2011. ( Copy enclosed)
The DRDO Hqrs CPIO, Dr.A.K.Tyagi, Sc’F’ is facing CVC probe vide CVCNo.569/11/9. Dr.A.K.Tyagi, Sc’F’ major concern to protect corrupt officials by not providing information to RTI applicants who want expose DRDO officials corrupt practices in procurement/ recruitments/ promotions / extensions etc. The current status of Dr.A.K.Tyagi, Sc’F’ case is the case file No 203/D/(Vig.II)/2011 was referred to CVC on 17th July 2013 from CVO, Ministry of Defence for further action.
In my RTI request is directly related to corruption in Sh R C Agarwal’s extension case, the guidelines FR 56 d was not followed properly. Sh R C Agarwal have no international or national reputation credits, his second extension backed by DRDO for Software Defined Radio Project (100 Cores), without any output PDC Date 27th July 2013, there is no further extension received by DEAL, DRDO till date. As per sources 18 members team of Project Management Review Committee found that project is not feasibly fit for further extension on 14th August 2013 but the DRDO will manage to get extension for another 12 months for wasting rest Rs 40 corers precious poor tax payers’ money.
It is requested to do needful action to replace Dr A K Tyagi from the duty of CPIO as he is facing CVC inquiry against him.
It is requested to kindly directed Sh B Bandyopadhyay, Under Secretary, & CPIO to provide the requested information as earlier followed by DoPT.
Copy of RTI request sent to CPIO,Under Secretary (Estt.A-IV) R.No.202, North Block, D/o.Personnel & Training, North Block, New Delhi on 23rd July 2013.
Copy of letter of Sh B Banddyopadhyay, Under Secretary, & CPIO, vide letter No 28034/265/2013-Estt.(A) dated 29th July 2013.
Copy of denial letter no RTI/01/2091/P/2013/0210 dated 16th August 2013 from DRDO Hqrs CPIO, Dr.A.K.Tyagi, Sc’F’
Copy of Sh Mohd. Moniruazzaman, CPIO vide letter F.No 29/41/2011/EO(SM-II) date 2nd August 2011
Copy to
Prime Minister of India, PMO, South Block, New Delhi
Defence Minister of India, Room No 104, South Block, New Delhi.
Dr. Syamal Kumar Sarkar, Secretary, MOP, Room No-112, North Block, New Delhi
To 25th July 2013The CPIORecruitment & Assessment CentreLucknow Road, TimarpurDelhi- 110054
Subject: Transfer of Application AR No 0178 dated 10 July 2013
Sir,
My RTI application to CPIO, DoPT dated 27th May 2013 was transferred to Shri Rajiv Singh, CPIO, & Under Secretary, MoD, South Block vide letter no AB14017/4/2013-Estt (RR)(03074/RTIC/13) dated 28/6/2013. The CPIO, MoD transferred my RTI request to CPIO, DRDO vide letter no Mof D ID No 21(3)2013(1083)/D(RTI) dated 5/7/2013.
Subsequently I have received information of my RTI request point 2 from DoPT vide their letter no F.No.29/38/2013-EO(SM-II) dated 15th July 2013.
The CPIO, DRDO Hq transferred my RTI request vide letter No. RTI/01/2091/P/2013/0178 dated 18th July 2013 to your office for information of point 1 of my RTI request.
As per my previous experiences regarding RTI requests all DRDO establishments 99% replied with their fix quote –
“DRDO is an organisation which is placed in Second Schedule of RTI Act 2005 and is therefore, exempted from disclosures of information under Section 24(1) except information pertaining to the allegations of corruption and human rights violations.”
Therefore, it is requested that the information is pertaining to the allegations of corruption. Sh R K Agarwal’s promotion case is totally based on corruption & nepotism.
I would like to submit some evidences of nepotism of Sh. R. C. Aggarwal, Director, DEAL, DRDO.
Sh. R. C. Aggarwal after taking charge as Director, DEAL put all scientists/staff of his community in important positions. You can verify with Departmental Part orders.
He supported Sh. R K Agarwal for his false claim of work in “Project NARAD”, which was the only real-time successful project and was appreciated by user (IPKF).
Sh. R K Agarwal claimed the aforementioned for his promotion to outstanding scientist and it was published in DRDO’s News Letter September 2012 page No -14
Departmental Part Order for manpower for Project NARAD reference are DO Part-I No.232/AD dated 18/11/1988 and DO Part-I No.238/AD, No.239/AD dated 24/11/1988. There was clear cut mention in the order that Sh. R K Agarwal was not part and parcel of Project NARAD.
The appreciation letter No 35795/Aks/per date 20th April 1990 by Major A K Singh, 57 Mtn Div. Signal Regiment to Sh Surendra Pal, Dy. Director, Project NARAD clearly reveals the names of DEAL’s scientists who participated and contributed their best in the real operation scenario. There is no name of Sh. R.K Agarwal in the appreciation letter.
The DRDO in their RTI reply No.DEAL/RTI/0003/2013 dated 08/04/2013 clearly mentioned that No such document/information is available, means there is nothing available which proves that Sh R K Agarwal was part and parcel of Project ‘NARAD’. It is clear evidence that Sh RC Aggarwal supported Sh R K Agarwal’s false claim for promotion to outstanding scientist because of the only reason of nepotism.
Note: above required information is directly related to corruption and not come under schedule -II
“Whoever does anything with the intention of causing wrongful gain to one person or wrongful loss to another is said to do that thing dishonesty”
To, Date 18th July 2013Shri Sarvesh KumarScientist ‘F’Public Information Officer (PIO)DMSRDE, GT RoadKanpur-208013
Hello,
This is with reference to News published in print/electronic media in May 2012 and DRDO Newsletter Issue of April 2012 regarding Development of Bullet Proof Jacket (GSQR-1318) by DMSRDE, Kanpur. Kindly provide the following information under RTI Act 2005.
The date on which GSQR-1318 for BPJ was issued by AHQ to DRDO.
Provide the copy of the letter from AHQ to DRDO for development of BPJ as per GSQR-1318.
Provide copy of DRDO HQ letter by which DMSRDE was instructed to develop BPJ as per GSQR-1318.
The date on which DMSRDE started to work on development of BPJ as per GSQR-1318 and the date on which BPJ-1318 developed successfully.
PDC given by AHQ for development of BPJ-1318.
Whether any team was constituted for development of BPJ-1318? If yes then provide name of the team members (Scientists, Technical Officers and Scientific Assistants etc) who worked on development of BPJ as per GSQR-1318.
Whether any project has been sanctioned from the DRDO HQ for development of BPJ-1318?
If yes then how much funds has been sanctioned for this Project?
Provide the copy of sanction letter of the Project for development of BPJ as per GSQR-1318.
If no Project was sanctioned from DRDO HQ for BPJ as per GSQR-1318 then from which head (Build-up etc) funds were arranged for Development and Fabrication of BPJ-1318?
Provide total expenditure incurred in procurement of items for development of BPJ-1318 including expenditure incurred on TA/DA to Officers & Employees, Government Transport and hired transport separately.
Provide copies of DRDO.MM.06 (demand) and copies of supply orders for purchase/services hired for development of BPJ-1318.
Purchase of materials, items and services hired for fabrication of BPJ-1318 were made under which type of tendering process (Single Tender /Limited Tender/Open Tender/Global Tender)?
Provide details of procurement of materials(items)/services hired/fabrication for BPJ-1318 in the following format :
Total expenditure incurred in creating facility in DMSRDE, Kanpur for R&D of BPJ-1318.
Total expenditure incurred from public fund for TA/DA in Temp. Duty of officers and staff involved in development of BPJ-1318.
Total expenditure incurred from public fund on Govt. Transport and hired transport for transporting the materials up to the site of SM Pulp Packaging Pvt Ltd at New Delhi/Palwal.
Names of private vendors/firms involved in development/fabrication of BPJ-1318.
Whether SM Pulp Packaging Pvt Ltd is registered with DMSRDE. If yes then provide copy of Registration Certificate issued by DMSRDE to S. M. Pulp Packaging Pvt Ltd.
Whether any patent has been filed for development of BPJ-1318? if yes then provide the copy of patent filed including the name of inventors.
Whether facilities for fabrication of BPJ are available in Kanpur (Yes/No).
M/s M Kumar Udyog Pvt Ltd, Kanpur is also working on development/fabrication of BPJ at Kanpur. Provide the reasons on the ground of which DMSRDE did not utilized services of M Kumar Udyog Pvt Ltd, Kanpur for development of BPJ-1318 using Limited Tendering Process?
Copy of certificate issued by TBRL, Chandigarh for successful testing of BPJ developed by DMSRDE under GSQR-1318.
Whether these BPJ-1318 were tested by another agency like CFSL Chandigarh etc? (Yes/No) If yes then provide the name of agency.
How many BPJ-1318 was fabricated by SM Pulp Packaging Pvt Ltd and total amount paid to SM Pulp Packaging Pvt Ltd for the fabrication of said BPJ-1318?
Whether user trials were conducted by Army for BPJ-1318. (Yes/No)
AHQ (Army) accepted BPJ-1318 (Yes/No).
Note: – above required information is directly related to corruption and not come under schedule – II
It is observed that DRDO is denying 99% RTI request under shadow of Schedule – II. This RTI request is directly related with corruption.
Find the application fee for the request attached with this application
I do hereby declare that I am the citizen of India. Kindly provide me with the information at the address mentioned with the application. I request you to ensure that the information is provided before expiry of 30 day period after you have received the application. Enclosed – Rs 10 Postal Order No 12F 470723
In recently CEPTAM DRDO invites applications for recruitment through DRDO entry test 2013 for the 844 post in various categories.
In the advertisement and CEPTAM website it was mentioned that candidates are compulsory required to registered their mobile number by sending SMS to 56677 in following format
CEPTAM 15 0112 231283 RUPESH KUMAR GOYAL
It is observed that last year DRDO entry test approximately 4.5 lakhs applications received by CEPTAM. This year it may be more and by SMS registration every applicant paid Rs 3 to CEPTAM, DRDO. Following mobile screen shot showed the detection of Rs 3.
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005.
Provide the copy of approval of competent authority to induct compulsory Mobile registration.
Copy of tender floated by CEPTAM for bulk SMS service providing.
Copy of Advertisement in Local Paper
Copy of minimum 7 vendors address as per DRDO procurement policy,if it was done by limited tender.
If Single tender the copy of appropriate approval from competent authority.
CEPTAM approached to DAVP empaneled SMS bulk service provider, Yes/ No
Provide the copy of supply order of bulk SMS service provider.
Note: – above required information is directly related to corruption and not come under schedule – II
It is observed that DRDO is denying 99% RTI request under shadow of Schedule – II. This RTI request is directly related with corruption. The contract was cooked with M/s MILLENNIUM SYSTEMS a computer peripheral supplier and well connected with Sh Rajesh Goyal since he was in ISSA. You can verify these things with back record of firms supply orders vs with Sh Rajesh Goyal’s involvements. The M/s MILLENNIUM SYSTEMS website http://milsys.co.in is shown the order of client list. If 5 lakhs applicants registered the money was huge 15 Lakhs and in open market bulk SMS service providers 6 to 7 paisa /SMS so any one can work out the play in this contract. The CEPTAM not given this contract through DAVP shows the corruption angle.
Find the application fee for the request attached with this application. If you feel that above requested information does not pertain to your department then please follow the provisions of Section 6(3) of the RTI act 2005. Also as per the provision of the RTI Act 2005 please provide the details (Name and Designation) of the first appellate authority w.r.t. to your department with the reply to above request, where I may require file first appeal.
I do hereby declare that I am the citizen of India. Kindly provide me with the information at the address mentioned with the application. I request you to ensure that the information is provided before expiry of 30 day period after you have received the application.
To 2nd May 2013 The Defence Minister Room No -104, South Block New Delhi – 110011
Subject: One of the Strong Reasons of the Exodus in DRDO
Honorable Sir,
As you already very well aware that DRDO is in neck deep nepotism and corruption and we all welcome your latest decisions like suspension of Dr. Arun Kumar, not giving nod for further extension to Dr. V. K. Sarswat, order for special audit to CGDA, etc.
Sir, your commitment for honesty and stride for eradication of corruption and nepotism specially in defence sector, we salute your honest efforts and we are trying to contribute some authentic information related to nepotism and corruptions prevailing in DRDO from time to time to strengthen your mission.
In this series I would like to submit some documentary evidences of nepotism of Sh. R. C. Aggarwal, Director, DEAL, DRDO.
Sh. R. C. Aggarwal after taking charge as Director, DEAL put all scientists/staff of his community in important positions. You can verify with Departmental Part orders.
He supported Sh. R K Agarwal for his false claim of work in “Project NARAD”, which was the only real-time successful project and was appreciated by user (IPKF).
Sh. R K Agarwal claimed the aforementioned for his promotion to outstanding scientist and it was published in DRDO’s News Letter September 2012 page No -14 (Copy enclosed)
Departmental Part Order for manpower for Project NARAD reference are DO Part-I No.232/AD dated 18/11/1988 and DO Part-I No.238/AD, No.239/AD dated 24/11/1988. There was clear cut mention in the order that Sh. R K Agarwal was not part and parcel of Project NARAD.
The appreciation letter No 35795/Aks/per date 20th April 1990 by Major A K Singh, 57 Mtn Div. Signal Regiment to Sh Surendra Pal, Dy. Director, Project NARAD clearly reveals the names of DEAL’s scientists who participated and contributed their best in the real operation scenario. There is no name of Sh. R.K Agarwal in the appreciation letter.
The DRDO in their RTI reply No.DEAL/RTI/0003/2013 dated 08/04/2013 clearly mentioned that No such document/information is available, means there is nothing available which proves that Sh R K Agarwal was part and parcel of Project ‘NARAD’. It is clear evidence that Sh RC Aggarwal supported Sh R K Agarwal’s false claim for promotion to outstanding scientist because of the only reason of nepotism. (Copy enclosed)
Sh R.K.Agarwal already created an embarrassing situation for you due to his personal bias towards Schedule Cast when he deliberately cut the APAR numbers of a Technical Officer ‘C’. The victim has already represented this to Director, DEAL on 11th April 2013. But the best part is that DEAL management threatened and focused all their lethal weapons to fix him. And soon you will get this matter from SC/ST committee.
Sir, this nepotism and corruption is in the peak and this is also a right time for you to select a dynamic personality who can first tackle this neck deep nepotism and corruption of DRDO.
Sir, you are giving answering regarding exodus of DRDO scientists to our honorable parliamentarian since last 7-8 years and quoting that the senior scientists E, F, G are not quitting. But you are not aware that by seeing this honoring of incompetent scientists due to nepotism the junior scientists imagine their future and quit for better future.
Second major point is the senior scientists who were/are super seeded by these incompetent scientists are suffering from, blood pressure, heart problems and depressions. Ask health report of senior scientists.
Sir, can we expect any miracle research from these bunch of halfhearted and blood pressure, heart problems and depressions patients? Not at all.
Sir, you can find some scientist ‘G’ age of 38/40/42 etc. but they achieved this due nepotism if it is not true than how many get international recognition of their research work.
Once again it is requested to see this personally in the interest of DRDO as well as in the interest of nation.
Always strongly standing to fight against corruption, nepotism, castism and favoritism prevailing in DRDO
DRDO News Letter September 2012
To 25th February 2013The CPIO RTI/DESIDOC/RKA/25/2/2013Defence Scientific Information & Documentation Centre (DESIDOC) Metcalfe House New Delhi – 110054
Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in respect of DRDO Newsletter September 2012 page No -14. In which the details of Outstanding Scientists of the DRDO. Sh, R K Agarwal, Outstanding Scientist, DEAL “ his main contribution has been the development of NARAD, the first semi-static and transportable terminals developed in the country. These terminals were immediately deployed in SRI LANKA during operation PAWAN where they have played a vital Role.”
The certified copy of his claim for working or association with Project NARAD.
Number of temporary duty if done by Sh R K. Agarwal in connection with Project Narad including deputation to SRI LANKA or any place in India during operation PAWAN.
Provide the copy of DO Part –I published reflecting that Sh R K Agarwal was deputed or associated with Project NARAD, in DEAL, Dehradun
Copy of appreciation letter regarding providing communication during Operation Pawan to IPKF by GOC, IPKF and then S O –in- C.
Number of technical papers published as first author on design aspects of SATCOM systems by Sh R K Agarwal in various publications? Provide the name of Journals /year/page no of publications and issues/ volume numbers.
On “Throughput Acceleration Satellite Adaptation Unit (SAU)” and the role and contribution of Sh R K Agarwal in its patent filing. –
Find the application fee for the request attached with this application. If you feel that above requested information does not pertain to your department then please follow the provisions of Section 6(3) of the RTI Act, 2005/Also as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 please provide the details (Name and Designation) of the first appellate authority w.r.t to your department with the reply to the above request., where I may if required file my first appeal.
I do hereby declare that I am a citizen of India. Kindly provide me with the information at the address mentioned with the application. I request you to ensure that the information is provided before the expiry of the 30 day period after you have received the application.
Note: above required information is directly related to corruption and not come under schedule -II
“Whoever does anything with the intention of causing wrongful gain to one person or wrongful loss to another is said to do that thing dishonesty”
RTI Request to CEPTAM
To Date 2nd May 2013
The CPIO No RTI//CEPTAM/04/05/2013
Centre for Personnel Management
Defence Research and Development Organisation
MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, Metcalfe House Complex, DELHI-110054
Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005.
1. Provide the following persons were engaged as experts by CEPTAM for Assessment Boards and Recruitment Board constituted in the year 2012. 2. If engaged, then number of boards, place, date and total expenses bear by CEPTAM with respect of following persons. 3. If engaged then their designation, organisation’s name and place of appointment. 4. Provide the following persons are related (blood or by marriage etc.) with Shri Rajesh Goyal, Director, CEPTAM, if information is not available with CPIO then get this from Shri Rajesh Goyal in writing. 5. If it is establish that following persons related to Shri Rajesh Goyal then a copy of correspondence with higher authority to inform about his relations with following engaged experts.
(i) Dr Madhu Goyal (ii) Mr M C Goyal (iii) Mr Sekhar Gupta (iv) Mr Anupam Gupta
Note: – above required information is directly related to corruption and not come under schedule – II
Find the application fee for the request attached with this application. If you feel that above requested information does not pertain to your department then please follow the provisions of Section 6(3) of the RTI act 2005. Also as per the provision of the RTI Act 2005 please provide the details (Name and Designation) of the first appellate authority w.r.t. to your department with the reply to above request, where I may require file first appeal.
I do hereby declare that I am the citizen of India. Kindly provide me with the information at the address mentioned with the application. I request you to ensure that the information is provided before expiry of 30 day period after you have received the application.
RTI Request
To Date 25th February 2013
The CPIO No RTI//CEPTAM/25/2/2013
Centre for Personnel Talent Management
Defence Research and Development OrganisationMINISTRY OF DEFENCE, Metcalfe House Complex, DELHI-110054
Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005.
1. Provide the number of experts called for Assessment Boards constituted in the year 2012.
(a) Numbers of Experts from DRDO – (b) Numbers of Experts from outside DRDO – (c) Numbers of Experts from outside DRDO who are not from the Interview city – (d) Numbers of Experts from outside DRDO who are related with CEPTAM officials –
2. Name, subject of expertise, designation of experts from outside DRDO. 3. Copy of If any policy/direction/guidelines available in CEPTAM for constitution of assessment board for different locations. 4. Total expenditure made for outside experts for the year of 2012 assessment boards. 5. Provide the names of CEPTAM officials if any who are related with outside experts.
Note: – above required information is directly related to corruption and not come under schedule – II
Find the application fee for the request attached with this application. If you feel that above requested information does not pertain to your department then please follow the provisions of Section 6(3) of the RTI act 2005. Also as per the provision of the RTI Act 2005 please provide the details (Name and Designation) of the first appellate authority w.r.t. to your department with the reply to above request, where I may require file first appeal.
I do hereby declare that I am the citizen of India. Kindly provide me with the information at the address mentioned with the application. I request you to ensure that the information is provided before expiry of 30 day period after you have received the application.
