To, 4th December 2013
The CPIO
DRDO HQ, Room No. 314-A
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 following information requests.
Provide certified copy of the DY No 2335/MOD/FIN (R&D)/ 07 dated 26-07-2007 issued by Ministry of Defence (Finance/R&D)
Provide certified copy of the document of ID No. 988/FIN (R&D) dated 08-11-2010 of Ministry of Defence (Finance/R&D).
Provide certified copy of the UO No. IFA/R&D/1236/0252 dated 27-12-2012 of IFA (R&D).
Provide the certified copy of the concerned document (i.e. concerned note sheets) of the concerned file of DRDO in which proposal, processing of the proposal & approval of the proposal for deletion of the para 7 of the O.M. No. ERIP/ER/0706100/M/01/1719/D
(R&D) dated 01-08-2007 is contained.
This deletion of the para 7 of the O.M. No.ERIP/ER/0706100/M/01/1719/D (R&D) dated 01-08-2007 was not guided by public interest but solely by conferring undue benefit to Dr. S.K. Salwan as a quid pro quo for his act of giving clean chit to Dr. Arun Kumar on the charges of corruption done by him in getting his own daughter Swati Srivastava recruited as Scientist ‘B’ in 2004 directly resorting to corrupt practices. As you aware because of this corrupt act honorable defence minister suspended Dr Arun Kumar, Ex DOP, DRDO and matter recommended for further inquiry to CBI on 29th October 2013
Raipur: It seems that the court’s decision on granting death penalty to the Delhi Gang rape accused is very less, as the male section is not realizing as to what they are turning our society into, by not stopping but continuously committing the most heinous crime that is ‘Rape’. As per reports, a Defence Research and Development Organization scientist Majumdar has been accused of raping his 30-year-old wife in Raipur, today, September 23.
The news was confirmed by Raipur’s Superintendent of Police O P Pal, he said, “A case has been lodged case against Tapas Kumar Majumdar, who is working with food research laboratory wing of DRDO, on the complaint lodged by his 30-year-old wife this evening.”
The complainant who works as a school teacher was married to the scientist in 2011 and she had no information regarding the status of his first marriage. The only thing she knew was that her husband had divorced his first wife, but later on she came to know that he had not divorced his first wife.
The accused has been booked under IPC sections 376 (rape), 419 (cheating by personation), 496 (marrying fraudulently) and 498 (A) (subjecting wife to cruelty).
The police are still investigating into the matter.
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 to 51 scientist ‘B’ recently recruited through campus selection from various institutions.
1. Please provide the list of Institutes where these campus selections were conducted.
2. Name of DRDO officials who were in the committee of above campus selections.
3. Provide the names from the list of 51 scientists ‘B’ recently recruited whose father/mother is working in DRDO and their post in the organization.
4. Provide the names from the list of 51 scientists ‘B’ recently recruited who are having immediate relatives working in DRDO, name of relative, the relation with newly recruited scientist and their post in the organization. If it is not available then please collect the same from the individual.
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 does not come under schedule II. As you are aware recently Defence Minister recommended CBI inquiry to probe recruitment done by RAC.
List of new recruited Scientist ‘B’ through campus selection
Appeal to DRDO honest officials please provide information to clean the nepotism and corruption from DRDO. As you all are aware that Sh AK Antony is also giving his support by taking action against corrupt officials of DRDO.
51 scientist ‘B’ recently recruited through campus selection
To,
Shri Sarvesh Kumar
Scientist ‘F’
Central Public Information Officer
DMSRDE, GT Road
Kanpur-208013
Subject: Application under Right to Information Act 2005
Sir,
Kindly provide the following information u/s 6(1) of RTI Act 2005.
INFORMATION SOUGHT
Provide the following information in respect of Tender Reference No. DMSRDE/13552064 published on website of DRDO.(Copy Enclosed)
Comparative Statement of Tender duly approved by SPC and Director.
Name of vendor/firm/trader (L1) to which Supply Order was issued.
Provide copy of supply order issued against this tender enquiry.
Cost of the material purchased against supply order under above mentioned tender reference
Provide following information in respect of business carried out by M/s Manglam Traders, Kanpur in DMSRDE, Kanpur.
Registration Certificate issued to M/s Manglam Traders, Kanpur by DMSRDE, Kanpur.
As per provisions of Rule 3.2 of Purchase Management 2006 of DRDO in which categories of stores, e.g., raw materials, chemicals, machine tools, instruments, electronics and electrical items, timber, fabrication jobs and other general stores etc., the M/s Manglam Traders, Kanpur is registered in DMSRDE, Kanpur.
Total cost of supply orders placed in the year 2009 and 2010.
Total cost of supply orders placed from 1st January 2011 to 31st October 2013.
Copies of supply orders placed to Manglam Traders from 01.01.2011 to 31.10.2013.
Number of repeat order placed to Manglam Traders and copies of supply orders issued for repeat order
Provide the copy of supply order placed against DMSRDE Case No. 13PDD014 dated 25.04.2012 initiated by Production Division.
Provide amount in Kg of Polydimethylsilane(PDMS) purchased in the period.
01.01.2009 to 31.12.2010
01.01.2011 to 31.10.2013
Likely to be purchased(Supply Order placed)
Copies of bills submitted by M/s Manglam Traders to DMSRDE, Kanpur against supply orders and repeat orders placed to M/s Manglam Traders, Kanpur.
The information related to purchase, supply orders, bills etc. has already been allowed by FAA, DRDO vide his decision No. RTI/02/2091/F/2013/0142 dated 14 October 2013 in First Appeal No. 142 on First Appeal of applicant.
This is to inform that Central Information Commission in its various decisions 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.
Besides purchase and establishment matter the information sought is pertaining to allegations of Corruption and as such not exempted u/s 24 of RTI Act 2005.
An IPO of Rs. 10/- as application fee (IPO No. 17F548630 ) is enclosed as Annexure-1.
To,Shri Sarvesh KumarCentral Public Information OfficerDMSRDE, GT RoadKanpur-208013
Subject: Application under Right to Information Act 2005
Sir,
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”.
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 (Ms. K. Surya Kumari Vs DRDO)
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 RTI Act 2005.
BRIEF FACTS FOR APPLICATION UNDER RTI ACT 2005
With reference to your Minute Sheet No. AE/Gen Admin/13/0578 dated 26 September 2013 and modified Minute Sheet No. AE/Gen Admin/13/0578 dated 04 October 2013, signed by Dr. D.N. Tripathi, Addl Director (Admin.) on behalf of Director.
It has been ordered by these Minute Sheets that “wef 01.10.2013 all officers and employees are informed to park their vehicles in the Parking Area constructed near CSD Canteen” and “above Minute Sheet is related to the officers/employees who goes to CSD Canteen for purchasing items by their vehicles”.
Facts narrated above in points (1) and (2) establish that CSD Canteen building exists in DMSRDE and CSD facility is available in DMSRDE
In light of above facts kindly provide following information u/s 6(1) of RTI Act 2005.
INFORMATION SOUGHT
Provide the details of officers and staff with name & rank that are attached and involved in management and operation of DMSRDE CSD Canteen right from Chairman, Officer-In- Charge, Technical Officers and Staff at present.
Total monthly expenditure incurred on incentives/emoluments to official working part time in DMSRDE CSD Canteen for month July 2013.
Provide the amount of miscellaneous expenditure incurred in July 2013 under following heads in DMSRDE CSD Canteen.
Balance sheet of DMSRDE CSD Canteen for the month July 2013.
Provide details of funds available with DMSRDE CSD Canteen in its Current A/C at SBI DMSRDE Branch Kanpur and all Fixed Deposits pledged with this Current account at SBI DMSRDE Branch.
The competent authority responsible for attachment of officials at CSD Canteen.
Whether rotation of officials working in CSD Canteen took place vide CVC Circular No.03/09/13 letter No.004/VGL/090/225753 dated 11.9.2013. (Yes/No).
If answer to point (7) is yes then provide the maximum period for which an official could remain attached with CSD Canteen?
Mr. DP Shukla, Lab. Attd. (Now Technical Officer) is attached/posted in DMSRDE CSD Canteen since long time. Provide his attachment/posting detail in DMSRDE CSD Canteen from 01.01.2000 to 30 September 2013.
DMSRDE CSD Canteen is a profitable unit which earning good amount of money by getting commission/profit in sale of store items at canteen. In which account this money is being deposited and the name of officers who are authorize/responsible to withdraw the money.
Provide type /nature of purpose for which the fund of CSD can be utilized.
Can CSD fund be utilized for purchase of item/store/services that are not used by CSD Canteen instead used by DMSRDE officials like furniture, construction of aluminum, partitions, distribution of gifts etc.?
Provide sales statement of DMSRDE Canteen for month of July 2013.
Cheque No. 871271 dated 22.7.2013 issued by DMSRDE Canteen. Provide information in following format.
Cheque No. 871267 with payable amount of Rs. 214312.00 was issued by DMSRDE Canteen (CSD) in July 2013. Provide following information in this regard-
Name of the firm/vendor in favor of which cheque No. 871267 with payable amount of Rs. 214312.00 was issued.
Purpose of issue of the cheque No. 871267 of DMSRDE Canteen (CSD) with amount of Rs. 214312.00 in July 2013.
List of items purchased through cheque No. 871267 issue by DMSRDE Canteen (CSD) for amount Rs. 214312.00 in July 2013.
User of the items purchased vide cheque No. 871267 issued for Rs. 214312/-.
The items purchased vide cheque No. 871267 has been kept in which place.
Copy of bill of vendor/firm for supply of items against cheque No. 871267 issued by DMSRDE Canteen (CSD) with amount of Rs. 214312.00 in July 2013.
Whether any fund was withdrawn from account of DMSRDE Canteen for purpose of aluminum door and grill partition in Security Division Building at reception counter.(Yes/No)
If answer to point (16) is yes then provide the expenditure details for the said work at reception of Security Office.
If answer to point(16) is No, then provide the following details
The agency (DMSRDE/MES) which issue supply order to accomplish the task for aluminum partition at reception of Security Office.
The name of vendor who make aluminum partition at reception of Security Office.
The copy of supply order issued for making the aluminum partition at reception of Security Office.
Total expenditure involved in construction of aluminum partition at reception of Security Office.
Provide copy of statement of expenditure for Rs. 255248.00 from 01.07.2013 to 31.07.2013 under Miscellaneous Head for month of July 2013 in DMSRDE Canteen (CSD).
Whether audit of CSD Canteen accounts took place by Local Audit Officer (LAO)/ACDA on annual basis. Yes/No
If answer to point 20 is yes then provide the copy of audit report of DMSRDE CSD Canteen for FY 2012-2013.
Percentage of average profit in sale of items/store at DMSRDE CSD Canteen.
Average profit of DMSRDE CSD Canteen in rupees per month in FY 2012-13.
How much funds/money has been expenditure in welfare activities from CSD fund in FY 2012-2013?
The information sought in this RTI Application is on Establishment Matter and as such not exempted u/s 24 of the RTI Act.
Besides Information sought is pertaining to allegations of Corruption and as such not exempted u/s 24 of the RTI Act 2005.
An IPO of Rs. 10/- as application fee (IPO No. 17F 549286) is annexed as Annexure-1.
To, 26rd October 2013Sh Avinash ChandraDG (R&D),DRDO,SA to RM, Secretary DRDODRDO Bhawan, Rajaji MargNew Delhi -110105
Subject: Foundation Laid for Recruitment Scam in DRDO
CEPTAM was constituted with aim and objective to recruit the technical/ scientific/ admin allied man power, who can be the workforce in major national DRDO projects.
DRDO Hqrs made it a mockery and laughing object. DRDO has violated SRO from beginning of CEPTAM and there are several cases pending in CAT/High courts all across the India.
The recent recruitment drive tells a different story.
CEPTAM – 06 Advertisement Published in Employment News dated 04-10th May, 2013.
No of post advertised in various categories – 844
Approximately 5 lakhs application received (excluding hundreds of applications misplaced)
Approximately 1 lakh applications were rejected for silly reasons (example followed)
Approximately 2 lakhs candidates not able to appear for examination held on 25th August 2013
Approximately 3 lakhs candidates deprived by Sh Rajesh Goyal, Director, CEPTAM
It is very big question, how DRDO can give permission to Sh Rajesh Goyal, Director, CEPTAM to play with fundamental right of young citizen of India.
Please go through the following facts which clearly shows Sh Rajesh Goyal’s, Director, CEPTAM personal vested interest
The SMS game – All interested candidates who wish to apply for DRDO Entry Test, are compulsorily required to register themselves on mobile no. 56677 of CEPTAM by sending a SMS in this format CEPTAM First choice of Exam City Code Post Code Date of Birth as ddmmyy NAME (Leaving a space between first, middle and last name) Example: CEPTAM 15 0112 231283 Rupesh Kumar Goyal (Name of Director’s son, it is example of pure chamchagiri environment of CEPTAM). Why this SMS system introduced by Sh Rajesh Goyal, Director, CEPTAM
Approximately 5 Lakhs application received and each applicant paid Rs 3 for each SMS registration.
Total money received by CEPTAM 15 Lakhs
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. Anyone 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 did not give this contract through DAVP shows the corruption angle.
No approval from competent authority to induct compulsory Mobile registration.
No tender floated by CEPTAM for bulk SMS service providing
No minimum 7 vendors address procurement policy of DRDO followed (Limited tender)
CEPTAM was not approached to DAVP empanelled SMS bulk service provider
M/s MILLENNIUM SYSTEMS – Provides -Selling of Computers & Related Peripherals such as :Range of Desktops / Servers – IBM / HP / COMPAQ / ACER etc.Range of POS and Kiosk / Billing Machines – Panasonic / Epson,Multimedia Products e.g. Video & Audio Processing Cards, Website designing and hosting. Man power Solutions / Recruitment Solutions /Data Entry. Annual maintenance contracts (AMC)
CEPTAM Website FAQ
Q-6. Is it necessary to send application after registering through SMS?
A-6. YES. Without registration number application will not be accepted. It is FIRST STEP for Applying for any post. (Note: Register for each post code separately if you are applying for more than one post code and get registration for each post code.)
Q-9. I have submitted my application on prescribed format but could not register myself through SMS. Whether my application will be considered?
A-9. NO; Applications received without registration number are liable to be rejected. Prior registration is mandatory for all posts, candidates applying for.
Application form the marked box for office use only
In above application form the marked box for office use only so hundreds of candidates not filled the SMS registration, result in this basis CEPTAM rejected their applications, who is responsible. Is DRDO ready to repay the money/time wasted by individuals?
Question is whether this kind of provision for like diesel mechanic posts and for SC/ST candidates who belong to rural areas and do not have access or are familiar with internet to verify or clear their issues, is allowed by government of India?
Example rejection of application due to SMS Registration
Example rejection of application due to SMS Registration
2. The CEPTAM asked applications by ordinary post and other option were put in 2 boxes in both gates of Metcalf House and 1 box in front of CEPTAM entrance. There was no mechanism to acknowledge applications. So what happened to hundreds of hundreds candidates who spent their days in front of CEPTAM reception but could not get their admit cards because simply they were told that their application was not found. If so then CEPTAM should show their accounts about how many postal orders they enchased against each application. The total number of available applications & postal orders will never match. There is no other example in entire government of India or PSU, Banks where application acknowledgement mechanism is not applied. CEPTAM violated fundamental right of young citizens of India.
Example application – not received/found
Example application – not received /found
Example application – not received/found
Example application – not received /found
3. Approximately 2 lakhs candidates could not appear due to wrongly assigned examination centres. It is not possible that the huge number of candidates themselves asked for the centre, this whole thing is deliberately done by CEPTAM on the direction of Sh Rajesh Goyal or otherwise it is clearly proved that he is incompetent to handle such a task. Please find some examples of admit cards issued by CEPTAM.
In Application centre city code clearly mentioned – 09 (Delhi NCR)
Admit Card centre city code given – Ranchi (Code -24)
Admit Card centre city code given – Ranchi (Code -24)
In Application centre city code asked – 09 (Delhi NCR) Given Kanpur (Code 16)
In Application centre city code asked – 09 (Delhi NCR) Given Kanpur (Code 16)
In Application centre city code asked – 09 (Delhi NCR) Given Ahmedabad (Code 02)
In Application centre city code asked – 09 (Delhi NCR) Given Ahmedabad (Code 02)
Wrong date of birth, wrong post code entered by data entry firms
In Application centre city code asked – 09 (Delhi NCR) Given Ahmedabad (Code 02)4.
4. Although CEPTAM corrected some centre errors and provided that list on the website but numbers (First list -89, http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/ceptam/CityChangeList.pdf second list 54 http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/ceptam/CityAndPCDlist.pdf) were few in respect to the numbers of candidates who were not able to appear i.e. 2 Lakhs.
5. There are many example in which any one can see, how Sh Rajesh Goyal, Director chose data entry firms who played with the future of young India.
Examples
Photo placed wrongly by data entry firm and Centre wrongPhoto Lalita and name in admit card Rajnish Kumar
6. In one of my RTIs, I have requested information regarding selection boards’ expert members, because it is observed that Sh Rajesh Goyal, Director, CEPTAM engaged his wife, his co-brother and other blood relation persons as expert in different selection boards all over India. Like Dr Madhu (Madhuri) Goyal , Mr M C Goyal, Mr Sekher Gupta, Mr Anupam Gupta . The act of Sh Rajesh Goyal, Director, CEPTAM assigning his relatives as experts violated the laid down rules CCS rules. No prior approval from competent authority was taken in this regards. This act can give liberty to do manipulation in recruitment. My RTI dated 2nd May 2013 and CPIO, CEPTAM Reply is enclosed here with for your ready reference. (Assessment Boards and Recruitment Board constituted in the year 2012) This mechanism is also following in recent recruitment drive. (RTI request and reply of CPIO, CEPTAM enclosed herewith for your ready reference.)
7. Please find enclosed list of the name and phone numbers of some candidates from whom you can visualize how CEPTAM, DRDO played with the future of young Indians for their own vested interest. (List enclosed as annexure)
Sir, above all examples are enough evidences to investigate the CEPTAM-06 recruitment drive, beside this lot of complaint already received by honorable Defence Minister and various authorities. The CEPTAM director putting his efforts to diluting and burring the subject matter. It is requested kindly do needful urgently for the future of young citizens of India.
Sir, please put your all sincere efforts to stop the corruption in CEPTAM. The approximately 3 lakhs youths are waiting for your honest decision to get fair chance of selection. Do something to maintain prestige of DRDO.
The main objectives of the RTI Act are – To promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority and
To set up a practical regime for giving citizens access to information that is under the control of public authorities.
RTI Act 2005 was introduced to make the government machinery transparent and enhanced the accountability for good governance.
Right to Information and has been given the status of a fundamental right under Article 19(1) of the Constitution. Article 19 (1) under which every citizen has freedom of speech and expression and have the right to know how the government works, what role does it play, what are its functions and so on.
The Act confers right to the citizens to know as to how the taxpayer’s money is being spent by the Government.
Right to Information Act empowers every citizen to seek any information, take notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records, and take certified samples of material.
DRDO although governed by Indian constitution and draw salary from central government funds.
But decisions are autonomous without accountability. They all are self style generals, they have own rules and rule implantations in own terms & conditions, but when succumbed to injury look for RM for protection and ask protection in the name of secrecy.
Like when an RTI revealed that induction of Grade Pay – Rs 4800 without approval of finance ministry now question of recovery of Rs 24 Cr is big crisis for DRDO, several court cases are facing by DRDO, almost 665 technical officers are busy to tackle the recovery issue.
DRDO management to hide their irresponsible act, making arrangements for reassessment for these technical officers. Please imagine the money involvement and man hour wastage.
The present Honorable Defence Minister has tried his level best and convinced DRDO officers/ employees to fall in the line and follow the constitutional provisions.
Honorable Defence Minister has take prompt action as per rule:-
Not granted extension to Dr V K Sarswat
Suspended Dr Arun Kumar, DOP two hours before his retirement day.
Charge sheeted to Dr. S M Veerabhadrappa just after retirement.
Node to enquiry for Dr W Selvamurthy, Ex CC R&D, Ph D in Yoga, Ms S Geetha, Ms Swati Srivastva, Mrs T Chandra banu, Scientist ‘F’
Charge Sheeted Dr A K Tyagi, ex CPIO, DRDO Hqr
Protected whistle blower Sh Prakash Singh, Senior Admin Officer-I
These well known decisions are in the right direction and has encourage the common people to identify incompetent, corrupt official , non performers etc of DRDO Labs across the India. So this cancer of corruption, nepotism, casteism can be treated in first stage.
DRDO has made it mockery of RTI Act – 2005. There are several examples in CIC decision; “ The Commission has taken a consistent view that notwithstanding the fact that DRDO is an exempted organization, this exemption applies only in respect of scientific/technical matters and not in respect of establishment matters.”
And best part is this that after CIC stands, DRDO went Honorable High Court for wasting precious poor tax payer’s money. Common man cannot digest who give power to these corrupt officers for saving their own skin they are using public money.
In case of DMSRDE, DRDO Lab Kanpur, some RTI were placed to expose the corrupt practices following in the Lab. As usual practice of RTI cell DRDO all were denied and after thoroughly and specifically made first appeal force to think first appellate authority for provide requested informations.
RTI cell DRDO intends to disclose informations. However, the RTI cell at Lab level put the sundry things under schedule-II exemptions. DRDO has protected its corrupt officials under exemption clause in the name of secrecy.
Please find enclosed copy of FAX addressed to Director, DMSRDE, KANPUR Letter No RTI/02/2091 /F /2013/0139.0140,0141,0142,0144 dated 27th September 2013 signed by Sh Bishan Singh, Astt. Director, RTI Cell, For First Appellate Authority.
A Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO) scientist was on Sunday booked for allegedly raping his wife.
“A case has been lodged case against Tapas Kumar Majumdar, who is working with food research laboratory wing of DRDO, on the complaint lodged by his 30-year-old wife this evening,” Raipur Superintendent of Police O P Pal told reporters.
According to the woman, who is a school teacher in Raipur, the accused had married her in 2011, while keeping her in dark about the status of his earlier marriage.
He had told her that he had taken divorce from the first wife and then got married with the complainant, who later came to know that Majumdar had not taken divorce, the SP said.
“A case has been registered against Majumdar under sections 376 (rape), 419 (cheating by personation), 496 (marrying fraudulently) and 498 (A) (subjecting wife to cruelty),” the SP said.
Majumdar is currently posted at Mussorie in Uttarakhand.
Further probe is on and suitable action will be taken in this connection, the SP added.
ToSh Avinash ChandraSA to RM, Secretary DRDO, DG DRDODRDO Bhawan, Rajaji MargNew Delhi – 110105
Congrats Sh.AvinashChander for AGNI-5
Heartiest congratulations to Sh.Avinash Chandra and all AGNI team members for the great success of AGNI-5 trials. It will boost the moral and reason to stay in DRDO to new upcoming young DRDO scientists.
Sh.Avinash Chandra is also keeping his promise to implement the Rama Rao Committee’s recommendations.
But major challenges are still waiting for your attentions like corruption and nepotism. Both are big issues that require careful handling and also strongly like Honorable R.M. Sh. A K Antony gave example not to gave extension (License of Corruption) to Dr V K Saraswat.
The recent extensions to some senior incompetent scientists are example that Sh.Avinash Chandra is still in the grip of corrupt DRDO officials.
In Dr.Arun Kumar’s case Sh.Avinash Chandra was member of inquiry committee and gave clean chit to Dr.Arun Kumar and later on Sh. A K Antony corrected and suspended the culprit.
Sh.Avinash Chandra’s weaknesses are with corrupt DRDO officials gangs who are enriched and patronized by Dr. V K Sarswat and Dr. W Selvamurthy (PhD in Yoga).
Sh.Avinash Chandra ji leave your weakness, without fear declare the results of Scientist ‘H’, since you have taken responsibility to develop defence self reliance of our great nation. Leave the small weaknesses and weed out the corrupt gang of DRDO. A lot of honest and capable persons are available in DRDO.
Dr. Anil Kumar Tyagi’s case is also an example, why Dr. A K Singh helped him to get result via DoPT advice, have they shown you that this kind of practice done by DRDO before; you just allow them blindly to follow this route. You have been receiving hundreds of cases where humentrain / medical/ grievances request for transfer and other kind of help by DRDO scientist and staff. Can you tell me a single example of where these stalwarts took fast action? I can send you a lot of examples where your HR/DOP dealings have been insensitive and the person has no choice but to bear it or leave the organization.
You can find their expertise and efficiency in protection of corrupt and incompetent DRDO officials like example case of Sh. R K Agarwal, who got promotion of scientist ‘H’ with false work claims and proudly publishes in DRDO news letter also, because he knows he managed his boss.
Sir, it is requested that you do the needful to save DRDO from the claws of these corrupt DRDO officials.
Please see the following:
Status of Complaint No: 569/11/9 against your one great scientist Dr Anil Kumar Tyagi, Sc ‘G’ CPIO, DRDO Hqrs
Date: 17/9/2013
Sent to CVO for Investigation/Action Taken Report on date : 16/3/2011
CVO Report Received on date: 18/7/2013
Prima facie material has been found against the officials involved. Regular Disciplinary action is recommended on: 9/9/2013
Sir, now how can you give such important responsibility of CPIO, DRDO Hqrs to such individual?
Waiting for your quick response
Regards
Prabhu Dandriyal21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun-248008Landline -0135-2787750, Mobile – 9411114879Email –prabhudoon@gmail.com Website – www.corruptionindrdo.comDate -20th September 2013
Copy to
Defence Minister, Room No 104, South Block, New Delhi – 110011
Dr. Syamal Kumar Sarkar, Secretary, MOP, Room No-112, North Block, New Delhi
DRDO violated the Article 309 by implementing interview in promotion of scientist F to scientist G grade without proper amendment in SRO.
NO Assessment interview requirement for Promotion from scientist ‘F’ to Senior scientist ‘G’ as per the DRDO service rule-1979-Rule-8(2)(e) ; but Chairman, Recruitment and Assessment of DRDO forward name before promotion committee after “ INTERACTION ’’ .
What is the meaning of interaction and what is its need against the rule? Nothing except the violation of law for corruption. UPSC conducted examinations for thousands participant for few seats then how RAC chairman want to stop the limited scientists opportunities to appear before the committee directly. Intention of Chairman is very clear.
Then Chairman, RAC Dr. P. S. Goel’s letter RAC/01/Assessment/PSG, dated 22-3-11 introduced this mechanism to give favor to incompetent few DRDO scientists and for this act in return he got Prof. MGK Menon’s chair, RCI, Hyderabad which fed him 84 lakhs per year. It is pure kick back or DRDO should prove the justification of his appointment.
What is this, is it not corruption? Best part of this type of corruption is money which he is receiving is poor tax payer’s money.
Question is, if he was competent authority to amendment of this kind of mechanism than why later DRDO amended this through Government of India gazette notification. He doesn’t have knowledge of the constitution of India, he is not competent authority to amend the DRDS rules which are framed under Article 309 of the constitution of India.
Where is law, where is administration, where is governance, it is happening in every stage in DRTC promotions also, where incompetent fake certificates holders are getting promotions and all relevant benefits, in recruitment of scientists lot of cases are exposed like Arun Kumar’s daughter, Selvamurty’s daughter, A K Bansal’ daughter and now several in queue like Narendra Kumar’s daughter, R B Singh’s son appointment are under lenses
Recently in CEPTAM recruitment drive nearly 5 lakhs applications was received by CEPTAM, they made almost Rs 15 lakhs or more by introducing mandatory SMS registration, pure corruption by CEPTAM management god only knows who is patronizing this kind of corruption in DRDO. The 1 lakh applicant were rejected, and thousands were not appeared due to examination center, CEPTAM did great job candidate who want center in nearby DELHI put him to Goa, Mizoram, Ajmer, Kolkata, Chennai etc.
RTI Request to DRDO
To 9th September 2013
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 the following
The amount of expenditure incurred on Internal Screening Committee ( Main ) held for promotion from the grade of Scientist `F` to the grade of Scientist`G`, under the following Heads separatelyfor the Year 2011,2012 and 2013
a) TA/DA on the Chairman and Members of the Internal Screening Committee (Main).
b) TA on the candidates ( Scientist `F`) who have appeared before the Internal Screening Committee ( Main )
c) Miscellaneous Expenditure, i.e. other than above (a) and(b), on the Internal Screening Committee ( Main )
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
The requested information is pertain to routine establishment / administrative matter which is not covered under exemption as decided by CIC (refer to CIC decision no CIC/LS/A/2012/002612 dated 22/03/2013).
There was no government approval for conducting ISC, main in assessment year 2011, and it was conducted illegally against the DRDS rules for the benefit to few incompetent scientists of their choice.
“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”
