The Supreme Court used terms like “blunders committed” and “bungling up” to describe the goings-on in the the National Technical Research Organisation (NTRO), the government’s ultra-secretive technical intelligence wing under the court’s scanner following allegations of corruption and financial irregularities.
A Bench of Justices H L Dattu and C K Prasad said in ab open court on Monday that the government has filed its third and latest status report. The hearing was based on a PIL filed by V K Mittal, a scientist who had pioneered the formation of the NTRO but later pulled out after being “disgusted” by the agency’s functioning.
Referring to the status report filed in a sealed cover by Additional Solicitor General Harin Raval, the SC informed Mittal’s lawyer, Jayant Bhushan, that “some progress has been made and they are seriously considering some inquiries and even termination of some officers after consulting the Prime Minister’s Office”.
“So far three reports have been filed. These reports go into the affairs of the NTRO… they have pointed blunders committed by these people and where they have committed the blunders. Steps are being taken, they say, and amounts lost should be adjusted,” the Bench observed.
“We will give them time till July 30. If by that time they don’t comply, we will make them comply. On July 30, we will give the matter a final look. Further hearing is not required. There has been bungling,” the court said.
The court had decided to keep an eye on the NTRO after the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) exposed the alleged irregularities involving top NTRO bosses in a special audit report tagged “top secret”.
The apex court had issued notices to the Union of India through the Prime Minister’s Office, Central Vigilance Commission, NTRO through its chairman, and the CAG in August 2011.
Created in 2004 under the Prime Minister’s Office, the NTRO essentially deals with missile monitoring, satellite and airborne imagery, cyber patrolling and security, cyber offensive operations, communication support systems, as well as cryptology.
Mittal had approached the SC after the Delhi High Court on April 16, 2011 refused to take any action, leaving it to the CAG “to proceed in accordance with law”. In his petition, Mittal submitted that mere disciplinary proceedings against the errant officers of NTRO was not enough as the “misdeeds of those officers warrant initiation of criminal proceedings”.
To
The Defence Minister
Room No -104, South Block
New Delhi – 110011
Reference: a) Your letter No 1409-VIP/RM/2011 dated 21st March 2011 b) Your letter No 1409-VIP/RM/2236 dated 20th May 2011
Honorable Sir,
During UPA-I you assured the nation to fixing accountability on DRDO an organisation which has never been questioned since its inception in 1958.
Sir, until 1980 the cost of projects were few crores but due to the visionary thought of then Prime Minister late Smt. Indira Gandhi the projects/programs were planned for self reliance in south east Asia and in particular in the Indian sub continent. The neighbors Pakistan and China were supporting each other to keep their upper hand but nothing deterred Smt. Gandhi to take decisions which may culminate to self reliance in the defence sector.
Initially the projects were planned collecting inputs from the literature available elsewhere. The proposals worked out where the cost benefit ration never assessed.
The changing technology was constraint and therefore projects/ programs during 90’s were given extensions time repeatedly, in some cases without enhancing the cost, where the cost was enhanced with proper justification were made. The examples are LCA, MBT, SAMYUKTA (EW) etc.
Easy methods were worked out under the guys defence secret to persue the projects beyond sanctioned time, without financial implications. Today in the last ten years the projects/ programs for which PDC extended did not consume more than 7000 crores rupees an amount equal to the annual budget of DRDO.
What is the fall out?
The revenue and buildup money sanctioned for running the projects were diverted to meet the day to day expenses of the projects the projects/ programs, which were running on PDC extensions. The manpower, the infra structure, the electricity bills, the salary, the TA/DA expenses were more than the cost of build up.
This imbalance between revenue and buildup was supposed to be checked by finance ministry.
Without active project and constant engagement of manpower in dead project resulted in to growing incompetency of laboratories.
What to talk about the Scientist ‘G’, Scientist ‘B’ were started giving justifications for the failures and compared the annual expenditure of DRDO as the expenditure meet to counter the natural calamity like earth quake.
Then the top brass of DRDO says 100 crores projects is not a big amount for DRDO. Indian Air Force is losing every alternate day on a MIG-21.
Let SA to RM justify the extensions of services to his beloved/blue eyed boys.
Sir, there are hope of Indian people with you please fix accountability on DRDO.
At least the finance ministry should cross check the equal flow of money in revenue and build up.
Thanking you
RegardsPrabhu Dayal Dandriyal
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun-248008
Phone – 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,
E-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com, prabhu@dandriyal.com Website – www.corruptionindrdo.comCopy to
1. Prime Minister, PMO, south Block, New Delhi – 110011
2. Finance Minister, North Block, New Delhi – 110011
3. Smt. Sonia Gandhi, Chairperson, United Progressive Alliance Fax no.23018651
To 11th September 2011
The Defence Minister
Room No -104, South Block
New Delhi – 110011
Reference: a) Your letter No 1409-VIP/RM/2011 dated 21st March 2011
b) Your letter No 1409-VIP/RM/2236 dated 20th May 2011
The bomb blast at gate No -5 of High Court, Delhi has once again proved that we are helpless. The government is helpless, Prime Minister is helpless, Home Minister is helpless that is all agencies responsible for protection of common man is helpless. Right hand does not know what left hand is doing.
Through this website I raised many issues of DRDO, Ministry of Defence, Government of India and found that no concrete action has been taken because Defence Minister is also helpless.
Accountability is missing in each and every level in the DRDO machinery. Accountability is missing therefore unaccountable assets are growing in individuals bank accounts and benami properties etc.
In DRDO there is no accountability at all; SA to RM is holding four posts simultaneously like SA to RM, DG (R&D), Secretary DRDO, Program Coordinator / Chairman Brahmos aerospace Private Limited etc. He is enjoys the unaccountable money with the help of Dr Vasudeva of SPIC and many more means but not accountable to national security. In Kargil like scenario SA may say that I am helpless because my past predecessors have not fixed the track of development and 30000 strong scientific/technical force whom I am leading does not listen to me, no where it has been written that DRDO is responsible to develop concurrent technology useful for national defence or DRDO is not responsible for developing a system which can go for batch production.
DRDO is using simply the word like (a) Mission Mode (b) Technology Development (c) Science and Technology basic research. These words have been borrowed simply to justify the annual expenditure which is forcefully granted by defence ministry.
I am not accountable and none my director is are accountable, SA’s punch lines which is maintained by in all labs meticulously. This the vision of DRDO labs for accountability, this culture is followed every effort is made
Directors are free to misuse the government funds as they have to match the exorbitant projected funds for a particular year.
How DRDO is helping the wasting the government funds is narrated by Sh S Ravind, PD, LLR, LRDE Bangalore to CVC, New Delhi.
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 Date – 30th July 2010 Smt. Sonia Gandhi, Chairperson, United Progressive Alliance 10-Janpath, New Delhi – 110 011
Respected Smt Sonia Ji The Times of India has reported the “Major Clean Up in Graft hit Intel Agency”
The corruption in purchase has been investigated and major penalties awarded additional secretary Dr MS Vijayraghvan, NTRO was directly under PMO, NTRO has been conceived by the DRDO. All those people holding the high offices in NTRO have served in DRDO at least for 20 -25 years.
The DRDO corruption culture is running in their veins. DRDO is training ground for technocrats to learn the skills of corruption using all technical terminology to fool forces, bureaucrats, financial experts and as well as politicians.
Defence Research, National; Technical Research, Space Research, Atomic Research all these research organizations started to accomplish a mission, to ease the life of common citizen of India, to enhance the economy growth, but the common man has lost the faith because they consume a heft some but deliverables are like piece of peanuts.
If we compare of technology development of North Korea probably we can find our self nowhere. North Korea is isolated from the rest of the world but they have the technology which can challenge the developed countries. It is due to the discipline inculcated in their citizens from decades.
Why we are not able to give due respect to our constitution. If we are not getting “some thing”, than we remembers the various articles of constitutions and there is lot of hue & cry for violation of fundamental right. But when its come to repay the due to constitution we simply ignore and than one man scratch another man’s back or blame game start.
DRDO in its successive failures of projects/ programs have justified the expenditure by comparing the loss occurred due to rail accident, or loss occurred by natural calamities/ floods etc.
Sometimes DRDO people compare their assets with assets of XYZ, who won the election and enjoyed the facility provided by the government. This sickness expressed just to justifies the expenditure where the system did not perform due to incompetency of top DRDO officials. There is rat race in DRDO now days to become rich like a smugglers become rich in short period.
The tactics used by NTRO in their procurement as well as recruitments are followed exactly are one tone, carbon copy of DRDO existing culture.
Honorable Prime Minister, Honorable Defence Minister must not ignore DRDO from the list of sick, unproductive organization, if it continuo like this, if accountability not fixed than history will repeat once again and the fighting forces lose their precious lives it is all due to non availability of latest frontline technology.
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.
