Please see the following RTI Reply from DRDO RTI Cell, in which DRDO RTI cell provide wrong and false informations.
RTI request
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005.
Total number of transit accommodation available in DRDO’s guest houses at DELHI.
How many DRDO officials are availing DRDO transit guest house facilities at Delhi for more than 30 days while they are posted in same station i.e. Delhi from 1st Jan 2007 to 31st May 2010
Total number of days Sh. S.Ravi, Additional Director, DRDO Hqrs has been availing the DRDO guest house facilities since his posting to DRDO Hqrs till date.
Total number of days Dr. Prahalda , CCR&D,(Ae &SI),DS, DRDO HQRs has been availing the DRDO guest house facilities since his posting to DRDO Hqrs till date.
Please intimate me date time for inspection of guest house records under Right to Information Act 2005 section 2 (j) (i) & (ii
DRDO Reply _ File No. CIC/LS/A12011/000412
Para wise reply pertaining to years 2009 and 2010 is as under:
(a) Total number of transit accommodation available in DRDO’s guest House at Delhi —105
(b) DRDO officials availing DRDO transit guest house facilities at Delhi for more than 30 days while they are posted in same station — 17
(c) Sh. S Ravi, Additional Director, DRDO HQrs availed DRDO guest house facility in Delhi during 10 Jul 2009 to 10 Sep 2010.
(d) Dr. Prahiada, CC R&D (Ae & SI) & DS, DRDO HQrs availed DRDO guest house facility in Delhi during 26 Mar 2010 to 20 Mar 2011. (False Information by RTI Cell, DRDO)
1. Facts : Dr. Prahalda , CCR&D,(Ae &SI),DS, DRDO HQRs availed the DRDO guest house facilities since his posting to DRDO Hqrs to 20 Mar 2011.
2. The Date of transfer of Sh S Ravi not provided
Brief facts of the case
The DRDO Appellate Authority Dr. Prahlada, CC R&D (Ae & SI) & DS have not given his residence address and contact details in any documents or website or any other public domain. I think he is staying in DRDO Bhawan itself. The CPIO and FAA of DRDO Hqrs both are on their posting at DRDO Hqrs, staying in DRDO Guest House and drawing the HRA. So how can Indian citizen expect any right information from these corrupt officials?
There more 9-10 CC R&D and Directors who are belongs to Hyderabad and Bangalore and their families are staying Hyderabad and Bangalore respectively and they all are staying in DRDO guest houses they are giving their residence address in telephone directory at DRDO guest houses and enjoying HRA also. They are frequent fliers, they all are already break the Milkha Singh ‘s (Flying Sikh of India) records and relishing without fear with TD with poor tax payers money.
Following DRDO senior official are staying in guest house since their positing to DRDO Hqrs and drawing the 30% HRA . it is big money and two major points i.e. one -these guest house not meant for permanent residence and second when the official come from various station to attend the meeting these guest house are not available for them and they have to spent precious poor tax payers money in luxury hotels.
There are more than 15 room is permanently occupied by DRDO senior officials in C-7, DRDO Guest House, Qutab Enclave, &6 official also unauthorized /occupied the DRDO Guest Development Enclave Rao, Tularam Marg, because as per sanction both places are as DRDO guest house facility in Govt .of India’s records. This is the purely dadagiri of DRDO.
Following DRDO senior official are staying in guest house as DRDO telephone Directory
Name of Official Office Ph No. Residence Ph No Residence Address
To
The Defence Minister
Room No -104, South Block
New Delhi – 110011
Honorable Sir,
Your attention is drawn to open secret, Russian were able to unify electromagnetic and gravitation theory. Just after world war –II the foundation of physics and electromagnetic discovery a weapon known today as “Scalar Weapon”
Even today the mighty Americans can never dare to see the soviet face to face. The giant transmitter releases 40 mega watts each and the transmitting pulses in advertently setup a standing wave around the earth. The first experiment conducted in 1950-52
The second experiment of 1 May1960 the defensive radars of soviet uses their prototype scalar EM beam weapons downed U-2 reconnaissance plane flying over Soviet Union that time the surface to air missile had not born.
April 10, 1963 Russians destroyed the U.S.S. Thresher with one of his new weapons. Scalar EM (electromagnetic-gravitational) beams, focused through the ocean to interfere on the Thresher under the surface, recreated spurious EM energy resulted the jamming of all electronics control system and the submarine sank under the sea.
April 11, 1963, two deployed Soviet scalar EM weapons fired massive scalar EM pulses through the ocean. The two massive pulses met and interfered deep under the surface, 100 miles north of Puerto Rico. The resulting giant underwater EM explosion hurled a mushroom of water half a mile up into the air, and the anomalous explosion was observed
In 1976 the power was further raised and 3-30MHz communication across the globe was interrupted. Multi beam light seen up to 200 miles and earthquake like situation was observed in China
In June 17, 1966from the air near Teheran, Iran, several airline pilots sighted a brilliant sphere of light, “sitting on the horizon,” so to speak, deep within the Soviet Union. The intensely glowing sphere expanded to enormous size, dimming as it expanded, always remaining “sitting on the horizon.” The pilots observed the phenomenon for 4 to 5 minutes
In 1977 from Alaska to Chile observed dense cloud.
In 1979 &1980 Soviet was able to test Scalar EM exothermic pulse, EMP flash appeared similarly to the nuclear explosion.
In March 26, 1987 the events related to the demolition of the Atlas-Centaur rocket which occurred on provides strong evidence of the use of Teslar-scalar weapons.
In June 1982 Japan Airline flight 404 & 421 pilots reported from 42 degrees N latitude and 153 degrees longitude sighting of a giant light over the about 700 miles east of Kushiro.
In 1984 gigantic mushroom cloud emerged above the ocean of the coast of Japan within 2 minutes the cloud grew to 60000 feets.
In 1985 an expert discovered the 54 powerful scalar beam with a separation of 12 KHz.
Soviets conducted full strategic exercise of their scalar EM weapons. After analysis was proved that the modern battle could be fought without movement of the personals across the border. The directed energy weapon or scalar weapon can turn the war scenario in favor of the country that is having these weapons.
DRDO with a huge infrastructure of nearly 1 Lakh corers and a strong scientific & technical manpower of 30000 in general & 6000 high qualified outstanding scientists receiving corers of rupees as rewards for importing the import substitutecan asked to development the technology of the scalar weapon
Scientific Adviser to RM is requested to find out the details of these dates and DRDO should plan to develop Scalar Weapon.
The CPIO
Under Secretary (Estt.A-IV)
R.No.202, North Block, D/o. Personnel & Training, North Block
New Delhi
Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005.
Dr. A. Subhananda Rao, CC (R& D), Director HEMRL, Sutarwadi, Pune- 411021 granted extension/re-employment as per rule laid down wide OM DoPT O.M.No. 26011/1/77-Estt.(B) dated the 18th May, 1977 for Central Government servants beyond the age of superannuation.
Extension: F.R. 56(d) states that no Government servant shall be granted extension of service beyond the age of 60 years. However, provisions exist in the rules to grant extension of service to certain category of Government servants only. Therefore, it must be ensured that no Ministry/Department should propose to grant extension in service unless the case is covered by the Rules
Please Provide me the copy of proposal of extension in respect of Dr. A. Subhananda Rao, CC (R& D), Director HEMRL with copy of certificate of Integrity along with the DoPT prescribed Annexure-I (Enclosed)
In the recommendation for extension of his service beyond 60 years whether any confirmation/ information regarding pendency of any criminal/ civil case against Dr. A. Subhananda Rao, CC (R& D), Director HEMRL is mentioned or Not.
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
No. 26012/6/2002-Estt. (A)Government of IndiaMinistry of Personnel, P.G. & Pensions(Department of Personnel & Training )
New Delhi, dated 9th December, 2002
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Subject : Grant of extension/re-employment to Central Government servants beyond the age of superannuation – issue of instructions regarding.
The undersigned is directed to say that the criteria for grant of extension/re employment to Central Government employees beyond the age of superannuation are laid down in the DoPT O.M.No. 26011/1/77-Estt.(B) dated the 18th May, 1977. After May, 1998 and when the age of retirement of the Central Government employees increased from 58 to 60 years, some of the instructions contained in the O.M. dated 18th May, 1977 referred to above have lost their relevance. Accordingly, it has been decided to revise the instructions relating to extension/re-employment to Central Government employees.
2. In the absence of specific orders to the contrary by the competent authority, a Government servant must retire on the due date. The date of superannuation of a Government servant is known in advance and ordinarily there should not be a question of failure to make arrangements for his release sufficiently in advance. It is the responsibility of the administrative authority concerned to ensure that the Government servants under their control retire on the due date.
3. Extension: F.R. 56(d) states that no Government servant shall be granted extension of service beyond the age of 60 years. However, provisions exist in the rules to grant extension of service to certain category of Government servants only. Therefore, it must be ensured that no Ministry/Department should propose to grant extension in service unless the case is covered by the Rules.
4. The proposal for grant of extension in service to the categories of personnel referred to in the first, second and third proviso to F.R. 56(d) -2- shall be referred to the Estt. Division of Department of Personnel and Training two months prior to the date on which the individual concerned is due for superannuation. The procedure for grant of extension to the Scientists is laid down in DoPT d.o. letter No. 28/19/2000-EO(SM-II) dated the 10th July, 2000.
5. Procedure for consideration of cases for extension of specialists in the medical and scientific fields:- It should be appreciated that even in the case of extension to specialist in the medical or scientific fields, it is not only the next man who misses promotion but often several people miss consequential promotions all along the hierarchy. Thus, too many cases of extension in service or reemployment are likely to cause frustration and affect the morale of the upcoming scientists who have exposure to latest technological developments in connecting fields. Keeping in view these circumstances, the following criteria and procedure has been evolved with a view to ensure that extensions in service to the superannuating scientists are resorted to only in really exceptional circumstances. The overriding consideration for the grant of extension is that it must be in the public interest and in addition satisfy one of the following two conditions:-
i) that the retiring specialist is not just one of the outstanding officers but is really head and shoulders above the rest; or
ii) that other specialists are not ripe enough to take over the job.
Test (ii) would be satisfied only if there is shortage in particular specialization, or if it is not possible to find a suitable successor or if the specialist is engaged on a work or project of vital importance, which is likely to produce results in a year or two. If specialists in the next lower post are not eligible for promotion on the ground that they have not put in the minimum service in the lower grade prescribed under the rules, no promotions can be made to the higher grade, unless such specialists put in the requisite length of service. But specialists who are eligible for promotion to the post against which extension is recommended, should not be rejected solely on the ground that they do not have as much experience as the retiring specialist. They should be considered for promotion according to the -3- recruitment rules and if they are found suitable they should be promoted to the posts being vacated by the retiring specialists.
6. Whenever any specialist is considered for grant of extension, his character roll and personal file should be carefully scrutinized and all other relevant information that may be available should be taken into account to judge whether the specialist had good reputation for integrity and honesty. In cases where the specialist is not considered to have good reputation for integrity and honesty, he should not be considered for grant of extension in service. The appropriate authority in the Administrative Ministry should furnish a certificate of Integrity along with the Annexure-I as follows where it proposes to grant extension of service.
“Having scrutinized in character roll and personal file of
Shri/Smt./Kum._____________________ and having taken into account all other relevant available information, I certify that he/she has a good reputation for integrity and honesty.”
7. While making proposals for extension of service in higher posts, it is all the more necessary to apply higher standards of efficiency to persons whose appointments to the higher posts are recommended for approval of the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet. The number of top posts is bound to be very limited and a few persons should not have them for too long. No Government servant who is on extension of service after the prescribed date of retirement should be promoted to another post during the period of extension of service.
8. No extension of service should be considered on the ground that a suitable successor is not available unless it is established that action to select a successor had been taken well in advance but the selection could not be finalized in time for justifiable reasons. A proposal for the grant of extension of service based merely on the consideration that the specialist’s predecessor had been given extension should obviously not be accepted. -4-
9. Re-employment: No proposal for employing a government servant beyond the age of superannuation of 60 years shall be considered. It is also clarified that no person can be appointed/ reappointed to Central Government service after the age of superannuation of 60 years through contract.
10. Re-employment of military pensioners who have not reached the age of superannuation for Central Government employees will not be governed by these instructions.
11. Appointment of Consultant:-
Detailed instructions have been issued for appointment of consultant vide DoP&T’s Office Memorandum No. 16012/7/97-Estt.(Allowance) dated 13th February, 1998. Hindi version will follow.
Sd/-
Mrs. Pratibha Mohan
Director (E-II)
To
All Ministries/Departments of the Government of India.
(As per standard list)
Annexure-I
Performa for sending proposals for approval of Department of Personnel & Training for grant of extension to Government servants beyond the age of superannuation.
1. Designation of the post
2. Duration of the post :
3. Scale and terms of the post and perquisite attached, if any:
4. Whether financial sanction for the creation of the post/continuance of post for the duration shown at (2) has been obtained:
5. Method of recruitment:
6. Name and the terminal date of appointment of the outgoing incumbent of the post:
7. Name of the specialist proposed for appointment and the service to which he belongs:
8. Full service particulars of the Officer with date of birth and pay drawn:
9. Names of other Officers considered:
10.If promotion post, whether copies of proceedings of a D.P.C. are being enclosed? If not, why not?
11. Whether character roll of the specialist proposed and those considered are being sent. If not, why not?
12. Please indicate:
(i) (a) Whether the post is scientific or medical specialist.
(b) Periods of extension granted earlier to the officer, if any
(c) Date from which extension is to be granted.
(d) Period of extension of service.
(ii) Justification for grant of extension:
(a) The date from which it was known that vacancy would occur.
(b) Action taken to select a successor with chronological details.
(c) If selection is being made, reasons why this could not be finalized in good time.
(d) Can some officiating or ad-hoc arrangements be made, pending fresh appointment by proper selection? If not, why not?
(iii) Whether orders of the Minister-in charge have been obtained?
13. Whether the prescribed Integrity Certificate, from the appropriate authority, is enclosed.
DOPT covering letterintegrity ceritificate - see the date?Dr Arun Kupar's play 1Dr Arun Kumar's play 2Dr Arun Kumar's play 3Dr Arun Kumar's paly 4
I have received a legal notice from Dr S R Vadera, Science ‘G’, Defence Laboratory, Jodhpur, regarding the letter which I have received by post in his name and the matter was related to the environment of Defence Laboratory, Jodhpur and posted on the website on 12th July 2011 and as you all are aware the website was hacked on 25th August 2011 and the same matter was not uploaded again.
In his legal notice he stated that some unknown person wrote a fake letter to Sh A K Anthony, Honorable Minister of Defence, GOI, 104, South Block by presenting himself as Dr Vadera and marked forged signature of Dr S R Vadera at the end of this fake/forged letter dared 05-06-2011.
Dr S R Vadera, Sc ‘G’ now wants to put his view regarding environment of Defence Laboratory, Jodhpur. The legal notice enclosed a letter which Dr S R Vadera, Sc ‘G’ sent to SA to RM and asked to publish that on the website
He also asked my regret regarding this episode.
Friends, you have already showed your faith in this website with your encouragement, comments and number of visits as well as your valuable suggestion and inputs.
I have received mails from almost every part of India and also received letter from Honorable Defence Minister, I am also in touch with all enforcement agencies related to corruption/ nepotism issues lying in DRDO.
The aim of object of this website is to help DRDO management improve the atmosphere and remove the corruption/ nepotism/ harassment prevailing in DRDO. There is no any intention to defame or harm the prestige of any individual.
In case of Dr S R Vadera, Sc ‘G’, I am sorry that his name was used by some unknown person and same was published on my website. The inconvenience and pain caused by this act is highly and sincerely regret/apology from my side.
The letter of Dr S R Vadera, Sc ‘G’, view in respect of environment of Defence Laboratory, Jodhpur is publish herewith. Most of my reader viewers are from DRDO and they know the real scenario and will understand the situation and will continue their blessing to me for fighting the cause.
Dear all, Wish u and your family a very happy diwali & prosperous new year. May God fulfill all your wishes in wealth, health & happiness in your life.
Please refer the subject decision of CIC 29 Jun 2011 received in this office on dated 03 Aug 2011
The information, as directed by CIC, is as under:
(1) File No. CIC/LS/A12011/000381
(a) The amount spent on Long Term Post Graduation Training Programme during 2008, 2009 and 2010 – 6,38,33,535/-
(b) The amount spent on PhD Programme under RT Scheme during 2008, 2009 and 2010 – 3,38,143/-
(2) File No. CIC/LS/A1201 1/000384
The total amount spent during 2008, 2009 and 2010 on the following Awards:
(a) Agni Award for excellence in self reliance – ‘ 75 Lakhs
(b) DRDO Award for Performance Excellence.- 60 Lakhs
(c) Scientist of the year Award — 60 Lakhs
(3) File No. CIC/LS/A12011/000385
(a) Numbers of papers published by the Scientist of DRDO during last five years:
Journal of Applied Physics — Nil
Electronics Letters – Nil
(4) File No. CIC/LS/A1201 1/000386
(a) Visits of Dr. Prahlada on official duty during 2009 & 2010. Number of visits to Hyderabad – 22
Total amount of TA/DA drawn – 4,11,900/-
(c) Visits made by Shri R C Aggarwal on official duty during 2007 to 2010. Number of visits — 26
Total amount of TA/DA drawn — 18, 23, 672/-
(5) File No. CICILSIAI2O11/000387
Number of sanctioned strength of substantive Joint Directors and Deputy Directors in DRDO.
(a) Joint Directors — 04
(b) Deputy Directors — 20
(6) File No. CIC/LS/A12011/000412
Para wise reply pertaining to years 2009 and 2010 is as under:
(a) Total number of transit accommodation available in DRDO’s guest House at Delhi —105
(b) DRDO officials availing DRDO transit guest house facilities at Delhi for more than 30 days while they are posted in same station — 17
(c) Sh. S Ravi, Additional Director, DRDO HQrs availed DRDO guest house facility in Delhi during 10 Jul 2009 to 10 Sep 2010.
(d) Dr. Prahiada, CC R&D (Ae & SI) & DS, DRDO HQrs availed DRDO guest house facility in Delhi during 26 Mar 2010 to 20 Mar 2011.
(7) File No. CIC/LS/A1201 1/000413
No Gazette Notification of D0PT is available.
(Dr. A K Tyagi)Scientist ‘F’CPIO, DRDO HQ
Copy to:
Central Information Commissioner – With refer to your 10 decision dated
Room No. 308, B —Wing 29 Jun 2011 in respect of Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal
August Kranti Bhawan, Bikaji Kama Place
New Delhi – 1 10 066
Real Facts:
1. File No. CIC/LS/A12011/000381
What I have asked in my RTI
Total amount invested on long term post graduation training program and PhD program under R & T scheme, and under Post Graduate Training (PGT) scheme of DRDO during period forApril 1990 – March 2010 under following heads
i) Adhoc advances
ii) Study leave salary
iii) Reimbursement of expenditure on account of stationary items, preparation of thesis, purchase of books and journals etc.
iv) Non refundable fee
v) TA
vi) DA
vii) Financial incentive on acquiring higher qualification at their own
2. Total number of official Grade wise/Post wise/ Categories wise received MS/ME/MTech, PhD degree during period April 1990 – March 2010
i) Full time
ii) Part Time
iii) External Registration
3. The Institution from where degree of MTech/ PhD was awarded from April 1990 – March 2010
4. Total amount invested on short term training/ workshops/seminars/courses in India (Including DIAT/ITM/IIM’s/ IIT’s, NIT’s, ESCI, ASCI, IISc’s etc.) and abroad, during period from April 1990 – March 2010
i) Training/ Courses/Delegations Fee/Registration Fee
ii) TA
iii) DA
5. Total number of Scientist resigned from April 1990 – March 2010
6. Total number of scientist joined DRDO from April 1990 – March 2010
Why I asked this Information –
DRDO sends annually many officers for higher studies particulars to IIT’s and national Universities. The admission which granted normally after tough competitions are available to DRDO’s sponsored candidates was easily.
Aim of such higher studies is to use the academic platform to solve the complicate technical issues. DRDO in turn give the IIT’s or Universities sufficient grants against project and R&T schemes.
No one gets benefited neither the institutions nor the DRDO, it is because the most of the individuals after getting higher education working as admin, allied works, and the reaction of this most of them leave the organization. For example Dr.DP Singh, Estate Manager, Scientist ‘F’ did his post graduation and PhDs from DRDO sponsoring and performing duty of admin purely non scientific assignment. Sh A.K Musla, Sc ‘F, holding post Joint Director Admin in IRDE, Dehradun, he also did his B.Tech and M.Tech from DRDO sponsored funds and working as purely in admin. I am quoting only two names as tip of the iceberg, because in DRDO you will find 100 of such cases. DRDO is shear wasting the corers and corers rupees public funds in the name of higher education programs. Although, the aim and object of the higher education program is really good, but in hands of bad corrupt officials, the output is wasting by DRDO.
According to the ministry, a total of 1,107 scientists, mostly young entrants, have resigned from the DRDO between 2003 and 2007, implying that on an average one person leaves every two days.
What I have received
(a) The amount spent on Long Term Post Graduation Training Programme during 2008, 2009 and 2010 – 6,38,33,535/-
(b) The amount spent on PhD Programme under RT Scheme during 2008, 2009 and 2010 – 3,38,143/-
(2) File No. CIC/LS/A1201 1/000384
What I have asked in my RTI
The DRDO Awards Scheme, in its present form, was introduced in the year 1999 to motivate DRDO scientists, engineers and partners in industries and academic institutions in contributing for the cause of national security and self-reliance. The present Award Scheme, instituted by the Government of India, are therefore, meant to encourage DRDO scientists and our partners in the Private Sector Undertakings (PSUs), the private firms as well as the academic institutions in performing even better towards accelerating the pace of development of critical technologies, transfer of technologies from laboratories to industries as well as productionisation of the state-of-the-art defence systems
The Scheme consists of a total of 17 awards, out of which, 4 awards are given by the Directors of the concerned laboratories/establishments in recognition of outstanding contributions of their scientists and other supporting staff consisting of technical, administrative and allied cadres. The remaining 13 awards are decided at the DRDO HQrs for which nominations are called every year from all laboratories/establishments. The nominations are initially short listed by the Screening Committee under the chairmanship of the Chairman, Recruitment and Assessment Centre (RAC). The short listed nominations are, thereafter, examined by the Apex Committee for finalisation of the awards which also consists of two outside experts. These awards are normally given away by the Prime Minister of India on the “Technology Day” which falls on 11th May of every year.
In this connection it is requested to provide the following detail information
Total amount of investment made on DRDO awards year wise from 1st April 1999 to till date 2010
i) Total amount invested in arranging Award ceremony
ii) TA/DA on recipient of the awardees and spouse
iii) All categories of all cash award by all Laboratories/Establishments and DRDO Hqrs. during period of April 1999 to till date. In following format
Why I asked this Information –
The awards given by Government of India like Padma Award, Shanti Swaroop Bhatnager Award etc all these awards are given with an aim to encourage/motivate/ recognize the contribution of individual recipients and therefore it carries a citation.
DRDO constituted its awards like Scientist of the year, Young Scientist awards, Technology Leadership Award etc. with the aim to inculcate a culture of hard work, dedication, scientific achievements, and technology breakthrough leading to the technology development for national security.
But the award given in DRDO, the mode of selection, the encouragement to the scientific team does not rely on the standards.
Different rules for different occasion or different rules for different officer, the motto of DRDO or the definition of DRDO is suitably implemented..
The public would like to know the manner DRDO spending nearly 2 crores of rupees annually to these awards, the recipients does not know that he has been chosen for this award, there is no scientific presentation of technology. The recipients, are even unable to operate any scientific instruments like network analyzer, spectrum analyzer etc because most of awardees scientist or technical personals are working as Director Management Services, Head Material Managements, Security Officer, Library In-charge, Works In-charge and other suitable position from where they can feed their Akas(Boss).
If any one look in to the list of award recipients and analyses year wise, he will be find the most of citation actually not even justify the work or relation between award and awardees.
There is N number of examples available in various labs where most of awards were not justified; it is purely depending upon the Director’s choice. So nut shell DRDO awards are like ”Andha banten revari apne apne ko de” it is nothing doing with their contribution whether the awardees is related to technology or not. How come a person sitting in security, MT will entitled to get technology award, when DRDO having other awards for non technical working area.
It is really big question in front of country people?
Like in Kargil, one officer got gallantry award and later it was found that the fake encounter was staged for award. (Famous ketchup Colonel Case)
Same tactics is adopted by DRDO they are distributing awards to their own boys with fake technology propaganda.
Since money belongs to poor tax payers, when Padama award citation are available to citizen of India then how can DRDO deny give details in the name of schedule –II exemption.
One award Defence Technology Absorption Awardis using by DRDO for giving color to their pet firms. Anyone can judge from the recipients list that these firms are really worth does these firms have any significant signature in field of respective industry like M/s Resins & AlliedProducts, Vijayawada. received this award from Honorable Prime Minister Sh Man Mohan Singh is related to Dr. A. Subhananda Rao, CC R&D, Director, HEMRL)
What I have received
The total amount spent during 2008, 2009 and 2010 on the following Awards:
(a) Agni Award for excellence in self reliance – ‘ 75 Lakhs
(b) DRDO Award for Performance Excellence.- 60 Lakhs
(c) Scientist of the year Award — 60 Lakhs
(3) File No. CIC/LS/A12011/000385
What I have asked in my RTI
How many technical paper were published by DRDO Scientists in International Journals like Journal of Applied Physics, IEEE Transactions, Proceedings IEEE, Transactions IEE, Electronics Letter, SPICE etc. from 1990 to March 2010?
How many authors were awarded by DRDO for their contribution and keeping the flag of DRDO high
How many such authors were assigned the administrative task to lead the DRDO Labs as Director and then CC R&D?
How many such authors were left the DRDO during April 1990 to March 2010 period?
Why I asked this Information –
Almost 400 Corers of rupees are distributing through these boards and different DRDO projects to IIT’s, Universities’ and Colleges and even some NGO’s, in the name of expanding and deepening the knowledge-base, Enhancing core competence in the field of knowledge, To encourage and provide funds for basic research in pertinent scientific disciplines etc.
The most of funds distributed till date to maximum private universities and private institutions and especially in last ten years out of total grants has gone to southern states. DRDO in its charter of duty has specifically mentioned Kashmir to Kanyakumari and Gujarat to North East the equal opportunity will given to universities/institutions.
The DRDO is giving funding for various R&T projects with IIT’s, IIsc’s and various premier scientific institutions. In return DRDO sends annually many officers for higher studies particulars to IIT’s and national Universities.
The number of international papers can justify the real out of projects working with IIT, IIsc and other various institutions.
I am surprised that DRDO is deny for giving information related to paper publish in international journals, where is schedule-ii exemption is comes in between.
Information sought is already publish in journals, so why DRDO afraid to give information. It shows that DRDO is not respect for RTI Act 2005.
International publications are basically the most valuable achievement of any scientific institute /organization and it always proudly mentioned by each and every institute /organization.
What I have received
(a) Numbers of papers published by the Scientist of DRDO during last five years:
After taking his charge as CC R&D at DRDO Hqrs, how many days he stayed in DRDO Hqrs up to 31st March 2010
How many temporary duties to Hyderabad he had been with total stay at Hyderabad.
How much in total TA/DA he has drawn year wise from his joining as CC R&D at DRDO up to 31st March 2010.
With Reference to Shri RC Agarwal, Director DEAL, Dehradun
After taking his charge as Director DEAL, Dehradun , how many days he stayed in Dehradun up to 31st March 2010
How many temporary duties to Bangalore he had been with total stay at Bangalore
How much in total TA/DA he has drawn year wise from his joining as Director, DEAL up to 31st March 2010.
Why I asked this Information
The information sought for is not related to end senior officer in his individual/personal capacity but in his capacity being a public authority.
Too frequent visit to a particular destination on Government expenses require to justify and as to how much it was beneficial to the organization and how much to the officer especially when he belongs to that particular destination. It appears that the permanent residence is his Hqrs and place of posting is a temporary duty station. The frequent move availability of the officer in the Hqrs. station may lead to problem of command and control and discipline, which may hamper the progress and led to undue delay and time and cost overrun to ongoing projects of DRDO.
In this particular case I requested the TD details of Dr. Prahlada, Appellate Authority, CC R&D (Ae & SI) & DS, who is staying C-7 Qutab Enclave, DRDO guest house since his posting to DRDO Hqrs, for him most of time he took his breakfast in his Hyderabad residence and lunch in DRDO Hqrs and evening for dinner he was again back to his Hyderabad residence. Please see his TD detail and then decide.
Second one is Shri RC Aggarwal, Director DEAL, Dehradun, since his posting he use to out from DEAL, Dehradun almost more than 250 days out of 365 days. How can the armed forces expect trustworthy products from these so called senior scientists?
There more 9-10 CC R&D and Directors who are belongs to Hyderabad and Bangalore and their families are staying Hyderabad and Bangalore respectively and they all are staying in DRDO guest houses they are giving their residence address in telephone directory at DRDO guest houses and enjoying HRA also. They are frequent fliers, they all are already break the Milkha Singh ‘s (Flying Sikh of India) records and relishing without fear with TD with poor tax payers money.
What I have received
(a) Visits of Dr. Prahlada on official duty during 2009 & 2010. Number of visits to Hyderabad – 22
(b) Total amount of TA/DA drawn – 4,11,900/-
(c) Visits made by Shri R C Aggarwal on official duty during 2007 to 2010. Number of visits — 26
Please find following response from our SFCIAN, DRDO Complex, Jagdalpur. Now it is establish that if you put voice in genuine matters then DRDO management can’t ignore it, beside the corrupt official sitting there in top like DOP, Dr Arun Kumar have to take decision as per Government laid down rules and on the basis of humanitarian ground.
So keep it up and raise your voice against corruption, nepotism and favouritism prevailing in DRDO by all means but same time consider the national security also.
The Government has allowed us to speak about corruption, so don’t fear to expose corruption because the corruption is eating our organization like termite. The friends from all DRDO labs sharing their problems of harassments, victims of favouritisms like in this time the DRDO lab Directors did a very much unconstitutional act. In A-Par they reduced the marks in some cases more than 10 marks and increased more 10 marks to their favourite ones. Here the question arises, that how come a lab Director judge minutely the work done by DRTC staff instead of his immediate boss who is leading the project. It is clear cut conspiracy or act of sabotaging the projects undergoing in DRDO.
In RTI anyone ask these anomalies but on the other side I want to inform all you that in DRDO, DRDC meeting it is decided that the RTI activities are to be suppressed and also suppress representation practices, in this year at the last moment DRTC result was revaluated as per new unwritten guidelines they cut those name who were involved in any RTI’s / representations.
In one case of IRDE, Dehradun, the chairman of assessment board did not like the body language of candidate and declared unfit for promotion. The question is that the DRDO authorities who made these retired DRDO officials as chairman on the basis to oblige them are well versed about the proceeding of board. Nowhere is written about body language, or what to wear. This kind of examples is lame excuses to hide their ugly acts.
Dear friends this forum invites to send your RTI’s even without exposing your names, the only restraint is that the matter should be correct and not for a vindictive aim. We, the team of www.corruptionindrdo.com, will take the issue up to highest authority.
sf complex, JAGDALPUR, DRDO (public money getting misused)outcomes of published MATTER IN CORRUPTION IN DRDO WEBSITE
We are very thankful to you sir, for published matter of corruption that going on in SF Complex, Jagdalpur dated between 21-07-2011 to 29-07-2011.
The major outcome of published matter as per our observations is as follows:
In that it was mentioned that GM’s (P.N.Tengli) favour scientist called tejasvi whenever he goes on TD to do GM’s personal Ph.D work he used to mention minimum 6-12 locations in single td.
observation:
WHEN THIS MATTER WAS PUBLISHED IN CORRUPTION IN DRDO WEBSITE,TEJASVI WAS IN TD FOR 12 LOCATIONS,BUT AS SOON AS IT AS PUBLISHED IN NET BOTH OF THEM GOT FEAR AND HE BREAK HIS TD IN HALFWAY & HE RETURENED BACK TO JAGDALPUR WHICH CLEARLY SHOWS BOTH ARE DOING REALLY MISCHIEF.
To purchase GM’s required items GM has kept tejasvi as cash purchasing officer for last 3year and continuing now also which is completely against Govt.Rules(it is allowed only max 6months as per rule).
observation:
WHEN THIS MATTER WAS PUBLISHED IN CORRUPTION IN DRDO WEBSITE, IMMEDIATELY GM MADE OFFICE ORDER THAT TEJASVI HAS RELIEVED FROM CASH PURCHASE WHICH CLEARLY SHOWS BOTH ARE DOINE REALLY MISCHIEF IN CASE PURCHASE.
GM is using hired luxury vehicle for daily travel to office of rental of RS.30, 000/- per month even though govt.allotted lalbadhi vehicle is available.
observation:
WHEN THIS MATTER WAS PUBLISHED IN CORRUPTION IN DRDO WEBSITE, IMMEDIATELY GM STARTED USING LALBADHI AGAIN WHICH CLEARLY SHOWS HE ACCEPTED HIS MISCHIEF.
WE ARE HAPPY THAT SOME CHANGE HAS BROUGHT UP BECAUSE OF PUBLISHEMENT IN YOUR WEBSITE.
BUT, WHAT & ALL THEY HAVE DONE MISCHIEF WITH GOVT.MONEY .i.e.,
a) DEPOSITING CASH PURCHASE ADVNCE MONEY IN THEIR PERSONAL ACCOUNT AND WHAT & ALL THEY EARNED BY CASH PURCHASE.
b) DONE THEIR PERSONAL WORKS (PH.D works) IN PUBLIC TAX MONEY.
c) MISUTILISATION OF CSD MONEY AS THEIR PERSONEL MONEY & utilisation of csd money FOR LADIES CLUB IN WHICH HIS CLOSE OFFICERS WIFE ONLY ARE MEMBERS.
d) MISUTILISATION OF GOVT.AWARDS BY BLUFFING GOVT. (BY MAKING FAKE DOCUMENTS) AND earning MONEY FROM THIS AWARD FOR THEIR PERSONEL BENEFITS WHERE REALLY DESERVED CANDIADATES ARE REALLY THERE.
e) There is a rule that temple should not be constructed in govt.land. But, the existing GM since,he is an hindu,he is constructing temple & in the name of temple construction he is collecting fund from vendors and contractors for which there is no accountability.
note: 1.what people other than hindu will go for prayer?
2. giving money to ravi sankar pandit sort of saints only for getting darshan of him for them only which is an csd public money?what rights they are having to give money to saint for their own darshan from public money!
f) threatening staffs that prohibition period will be increased if they are not listening to them and giving promotion to their favouring persons viloating eligible persons by holding hrd incharge post.
so,
WHAT IS THE ACCOUNTABLITY FOR ABOVESAID MISCHIEFS & CORRUPTION? LIKE THIS THEY HAVE TO APPRECEIATED TO BECOME KING OF CORRUPTIONS ?
(OR)
THEY HAVE TO BE PUNISHED?
WHETHER GOVT.WILL TAKE SOME ACTION AGAINST TEHM TO MAKE THEM ALLRIGHT?
(OR)
WHETHER DRDO WILL GROW IN THIS CORRUPTION ENVIRONEMENT FOR DEVELOPING DEFENSIVE PRODUCTS FOR NATIONAL PROTECTION?
IT IS BIG QUESTION?????????????
yes! Govt has to take necessary action for all above-said because
It is involved
Public tax money! Public tax money! Public tax money!
&
Hence,
Please save public money!
-C.
FROM SF COMPLEX,DRDO, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE,AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING,JAGDALPUR,CHATTISGARGH-494001.PH.NO:07867-289461-65.FAX.NO:07867-289466.
SFCIANS, SF COMPLEX, DRDO, JAGDALPUR – DOP, DRDO IS DEAF & DUMB
The reply of my RTI related to SFCian issue was denied by DRDO Hqrs under the shelter of Schedule- II of RTI Act 2005.
As per section 19 of RTI Act 2005 I have appealed to DRDO Hqrs appellate authority and as you very well know that he is deaf & dumb for humanity issues and only act fast on personal issues in which he has some personal interest. So reply is known but we will take this issue up to supreme authorities.
Hope for best……………………
My RTI Request –
To 19 September 2011 CPIO & Addl Director, 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 SF Complex, JAGDALPUR
1) The official address of SF Complex (one of the labs/Establishment of DRDO), JAGDALPUR?
2) Copy of D O part order or any other order regarding the place of reporting duty at Plant Girola Village which is 40 Kms away from Jagdalpur.
3) Copy of D O part order any other order in which the employees posted at SF complex first they report to duty at SF Complex then report for duty at Girola Plant Site.
4) The copies of movement order of transports which carries the employees daily to Girola plant site from SF Complex from 1/7/2011 to 15/07/2011
5) The copy of fitness certificates of those vehicles which carries the employees daily to Girola plant site from SF Complex from competent authority.
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 human right not come under schedule -II – why because it is noticed that without proper movement orders and without proper maintained vehicles the employees of SF complex are going daily at Girola plant. Earlier in one accident case it is heard that the movement order was made by SF Complex administration in back date to give financial benefits to the deceased family.
First Appeal to Appellate Authority of DRDO 12th September 2011
The Right to Information Act, 2005
First Appeal for Central Govt.
I.D. No_________ Date: _________ [For office use]
To
Dr Arun Kumar OS & Director, Directorate of PersonalRoom No.-217, DRDO Bhawan , Rajaji Marg New Delhi – 110105
Sir,
As I am aggrieved by decision/no decision of Central Public Information Officer, I hereby file this appeal for your kind decision.
The reply of CPIO, DRDO, is completely confusing, misleading, incorrect, unjustified and willful not give any information, does not following the spirit of RTI Act 2005.
The information asked about SF Complex Jagdalpur is not come any norms of secrecy. I am not asking about any work or project information of SF Jagdalpur Unit. 1. Details of appellant
1.1 Full Name: Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal
1.2. Full Address: 21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun-248008
1.3 Phone/Cell No. 0135-2787750 / 919411114879
1.4 Email ID: prabhu@dandriyal.com
2. Details of CPIO:
2.1 Name/Designation: Dr A K Tyagi, CPIO, Head RTI Cell, Scientist ‘F’
2.2 Full Address : Room No 314 A, DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg, New Delhi -110105
2.3 Name of Public Authority: DRDO, Ministry of Defence, Government of India
3. Details of RTI application to CPIO:
Date of Application : 19th July 2011
Mailed on: 19th July 2011
by speed post
4. Particulars of payment of filing fee:
Paid Rs.10/- by Postal Order No. 90E 611227
5. Details of information sought:
1) The official address of SF Complex (one of the labs/Establishment of DRDO), JAGDALPUR?
2) Copy of D O part order or any other order regarding the place of reporting duty at Plant Girola Village which is 40 Kms away from Jagdalpur.
3) Copy of D O part order any other order in which the employees posted at SF complex
first they report to duty at SF Complex then report for duty at Girola Plant Site.
4) The copies of movement order of transports which carries the employees daily to Girola plant site from SF Complex from 1/7/2011 to 15/07/2011
5) The copy of fitness certificates of those vehicles which carries the employees daily to Girola plant site from SF Complex from competent authority.
Note: above required information is directly related to corruption and human right not come under schedule -II – why because it is noticed that without proper movement orders and without proper maintained vehicles the employees of SF complex are going daily at Girola plant. Earlier in one accident case it is heard that the movement order was made by SF Complex administration in back date to give financial benefits to the deceased family.
6. Particulars of Decision of CPIO:
Date of CPIO’s Decision:9th August 2011
Date of receipt of decision by the appellant:12th August 2011
7. Brief facts of the case:
The official address of SF Complex is “SF COMPLEX, AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING, JAGDALPUR-494001”. SFC Employees are given appointment letters with above address as reporting place. But, all are forced to report at the above address as well as at its work centre located at Girola village, Bakawand block, Bastar district. This location is completely out of 40 Kms away from municipality (Jagdalpur) of the official address.
As per rule they should report at the place of posting as per the appointment letter. But it is not so. Is it (forcing to report at other place) not violation of an employee’s right to report at the posting place? The management says that reporting place is at Girola and same time management says Airport terminal building, Jagdalpur. It is clear cut case of harassment of employees of SF Complex.
One example: one of the scientists, named Shri Kushal Sahoo, was killed in an accident near Bakawand last year while returning from the Girola site to Jagdalpur in Bolero vehicle. Bakawand police station filed FIR and accident report (can refer the same with the police station). When settling the case the DRDO HQs asked the official movement order to consider it as death while performing duty. As the movement order was not issued actually for him and few more travelling in the same vehicle they were also injured, management of SF Complex made a statement of case stating that “Kusahl Sahoo is travelling for the purpose of meeting at Airport Terminal Building, Jagdalpur office”.
If the travelling from Jagdalpur to Girola and back is official and as per the rule and the rule position should be clear for all for management, employees and the general public. After this accident all the staff of SF Complex Jagdalpur took a decision and reported at posting place only. This happened for two days and later management has interfered and threatened to them for report at Girola and told them if they will not report at Girola, will get termination letter. Employees were forced to report at Girola. It is a violation of Human Right? Reporting at posting place is not correct? Then why appointment letters were given like that? DRDO has to duty to provide them proper necessary papers as per rule position of Central Government.
The requested information is not come under 8(1) (a) and 24 (1) of the RTI Act at all because the information asked not in the nature of secrecy like The copy of fitness certificates of those vehicles which carries the employees daily to Girola plant site from SF Complex from competent authority. This the major concern of family and friends of employees of SF complex for their safety and well beings. For mere few thousand Rupees from contractors as bribe the Top DRDO officials playing with the life of SF Complex Employees.
The required information is fall under corruption and as well as violation human right and therefore in any means it is not come under schedule –II exemption of RTI Act 2005.
“RTI is a key instrument for imposing democratic values, accountability and transparency in our public administration,” Dr.Shah Faisal (IAS topper 2010 & RTI activist of J&K RTI Movement NGO) told Sakàl Times
8. Reasons/grounds for this appeal: i) To know the sensitiveness and work environment of DRDO ii) To expose the corrupt practices prevailing in DRDO
9. Any other information in support of appeal: 10. Prayer/relief sought for:
It is requested that please provide me correct information as per request of my RTI dated 19th July 2011 in larger public interest, because it is directly related to corruption and violation of Human rights. 11. Enclosures:
i) My RTI request dated 19th July 2011 ii) Denial of CPIO, DRDO Hqrs dated 09 August 201112. Declaration:
I hereby state that the information and particulars given above are true to the best of my knowledge and belief. I also declare that this matter is not previously filed with any information commission nor is pending with any Court or tribunal or authority.
