Tag Archives: Rajasthan

Drdo

Army moves to court martial officer accused of sexually abusing subordinate

Leave a comment

By Pradip R. Sagar March 24, 2018 -THE WEEK

Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman with a group of women Army officers | Facebook account of Indian Army’s ADGPI

The Indian Army has initiated court martial proceedings against the former commanding officer of a Alwar-based military unit after a 27-year-old woman Army captain levelled allegations of sexual harassment against the officer.

Captain Poonam (name changed) joined the Army’s Signals Corps as a technical officer in 2013.

In August 2015, she filed a sexual harassment complaint against the commanding officer of her unit while she was posted at the Alwar military station in Rajasthan.

In her complaint to higher authorities, the woman officer alleged that her commanding officer started sexually abusing her soon after joining her unit. He allegedly touched her private parts and made remarks like “Do you have a boyfriend?”

When her complaint went unheeded, the victim wrote to then Army chief general Dalbir Singh Suhag, saying she approached him “bypassing all channels for redressal of my grievances because an earlier attempt through proper channel failed to provide justice.”

In fact, her father wrote to then defence minister Manohar Parrikar by making an emotional appeal, “If this is the way the Indian Army treats its daughters, I’m not sure if any parent will ever send their daughters to the Army.”

Eventually, Army Headquarters started a court of inquiry in late 2015, when her issue was highlighted by the national media.

After two years of extensive proceedings of the court of inquiry and subsequently the summary of evidences, which established prima facie guilt of the commanding officer, court martial proceedings were ordered to commence from Saturday (March 24).

“General Court Martial of the former Commanding Officer of 12 Field Sub area will commence from March 24,” an Army order stated; the order mentions two brigadiers have been made witnesses.

Drdo

SC cancels engineering degrees given by deemed universities through correspondence course

1 Comment

Amit Anand Choudhary | TIMESOFINDIA.COM | Updated: Nov 3, 2017, 16:26 IST
HIGHLIGHTS
The apex court restrained educational institutions from providing courses in subjects like engineering, in the distance education mode
With its ruling, the SC affirmed the findings of the Punjab and Haryana high court on the issue
Also with its ruling, the SC set aside a verdict by the Odisha high court, which allowed technical education by correspondence
NEW DELHI: Engineering degrees of hundreds of students who pursued education through correspondence course from four deemed Universities — JRN Rajasthan Vidyapeeth, Institute of Advanced Studies in Education in Rajasthan, Allahabad Agricultural Institute and Vinayaka Mission Research Foundation in Tamil Nadu from year 2001 on wards have been quashed by the Supreme Court.
A bench of Justices AK Goel and UU Lalit, however, allowed students of 2001-05 batch to get their degree by appearing in the examination to be conducted by AICTE but it cancelled the degrees of students of subsequent batches as the deemed university had not got approval from authorities for the course.
“As regards students who were admitted after the academic sessions 2001-2005, their degrees in engineering awarded by the concerned deemed to be universities through distance education mode stand recalled and be treated as cancelled. All benefits secured by such candidates shall stand withdrawn. However, the entire amount paid by such students to the concerned deemed to be universities towards tuition fees and other expenditure shall be returned by the concerned deemed to be universities,” the bench said.
The apex court also restrained deemed universities from offering correspondence courses without getting approval from AICTE. “We restrain all “deemed to be universities” to carry on any courses in distance education mode from the academic session 2018- 2019 onwards unless and until it is permissible to conduct such courses in distance education mode and specific permissions are granted by the concerned statutory/regulatory authorities in respect of each of those courses and unless the off-campus centres/study centres are individually inspected and found adequate by the concerned statutory authorities. The approvals have to be course specific,” the bench said.
The court also directed CBI inquiry to catch the government officials who had allowed deemed universities to offer the distance learning courses which was not allowed. The court asked the government to constitute a high-level committee to examine the functioning of deemed universities.
We direct the CBI to carry out thorough investigation into the conduct of the concerned officials who dealt with the matters and went about the granting permissions against the policy statement, as indicated in Para 49 above and into the conduct of institutions who abused their position to advance their commercial interest illegally.
“The Union of India may constitute a three members Committee comprising of eminent persons who have held high positions in the field of education, investigation, administration or law at national level within one month. The Committee may examine the issues indicated above and suggest a road map for strengthening and setting up of oversight and regulatory mechanism in the relevant field of higher education and allied issues within six months. The Committee may also suggest oversight mechanism to regulate the Deemed to be Universities. The Union of India may examine the said report and take such action as may be considered appropriate within one month thereafter and file an affidavit in this Court of the action taken on or before August 31, 2018” it said.

PMO

Prime Minister’s Office Marked Rao’s Mail as `Grievance’

14 Comments

Mar 13 2015 : The Economic Times (Delhi)

Lands in hot water with DAE bosses for writing to PM
He wrote to the prime minister, tried to do good for a critical national project, and now he’s in trouble.
One of India’s senior nuclear scientists, Pashupati Rao, who works at Nuclear Fuel Complex (NFC), run by the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE), is now battling his employer for having written to the prime minister offering suggestions on streamlining the setting up of a new nuclear facility at Kota, Rajasthan. DAE comes under the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO).

ET has reviewed the relevant correspondence between the PMO, DAE and the scientist. The PMO didn’t respond to ET’s queries on this matter.Rao did not participate in this story.DAE responded to ET’s questions. On September 28, 2014, Rao sent his suggestions to PM’s official portal (pmindia.gov.in), which invites citizens to share ideas as well as to write to the Prime Minister.

But although Rao had communicated sensitive matters on the new nuclear complex, the PMO had sent them to Rao’s employer, DAE, marking them as `grievance’, and it sent a mail to Rao on January 21 this year, saying his `grievance’ has been disposed. The PMO’s communication to Rao’s employers had also given the name and designation of the scientist, thus making his full identity known to his superiors.

This started a process of DAE relentlessly asking for explanations from the scientist and the latter desperately seeking to explain himself. Some DAE officials who did not want to be identified told ET that Rao may face serious consequences.

Prominent whistleblower Prabhu Dandriyal, who some years ago had claimed to have exposed corruption in Defence Research & Development Organisation, filed a Right to Information application on January 27 this year with the PMO on Rao’s matter.

Dandriyal had asked what guidelines the PMO follows when dealing with `sensitive’ communication from government officials. He said the PMO reply that came a month later, on February 27, said the request is being processed, and de tails are being collected.

Rao’s suggestions sent to the prime minister on the Kota project contained, apart from technical details on cutting costs, a proposal that an independent team be appointed to review the project.

BUREAUCRATIC NIGHTMARE

But the PMO sending his suggestions as `grievance’ to DAE has put the top nuclear scientist in a bureaucratic nightmare.The PMO’s communications were sent to NFC, Hyderabad, where Rao worked, and his superiors have turned the matter into `staff grievance’ and have been seeking explanations from Rao.

In a series of communications, Rao tried to explain that he did not have any personal grievance.

“I am a successful officer and I have been awarded with DAE group achievement award for indigenisation associated work. My feedback given to the PMO which is converted as my grievance is not aimed at any individual,“ the scientist wrote in one of his attempts to explain himself. However, DAE has not relented and on February 10, Rao received a letter from the Grievance Redressal Committee that reminded him his job was limited to helping in the maintenance of NFC.et clip

“As an organisation, we will follow the process. As he is a staff member, it is being treated as a staff grievance and is being looked into,“ S Goverdhan Rao, deputy chief executive of NFC, told ET.

Dandriyal, who’s still awaiting a full reply from PMO, said, “It will be very difficult for people from the system to come out and expose corruption and inefficiency if there is no mechanism to protect them.“

Drdo

RTI-PCDA (R&D) – Verification of Diploma/Degree

1 Comment
To,                                                                                                                    16th July 2014
Shri Pritam Dutta, IDAS
ACDA, CPIO,CVO
O/o PCDA (R&D), West Block-V
R K PURAM
NEW DELHI- 110066              

 

Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in respect of audit of service books of DRDO officials. It is observed that several DRDO officials were acquired Diploma, Degree after joining DRDO from various deemed universities  via distance education mode etc  and most of the cases the courses are not recognised by APEX body like  AICTE,DEC etc  in RTI replies DRDO also accepted this facts.   It is also observed that the individuals who received such diploma/ degrees were also received lump sum incentive grants for acquiring higher qualification as per DOPT OM No. 1/2/89-Estt Pay-I dated 9.4.99 but their respective acquired qualifications were not duly verified by DRDO

  1. Provide the certified copies of verification reports provide by DRDO in respect of following individuals.

Acquired from JNTU, Hyderabad

  1. Sh. Siyaram, STA B  RCI  B Tech Mech   1.6.2010
  2. Shri A Venkateshwara Rao, STA B DRDL,  B Tech Mech  1.8.2010
  3. Sh. G Venkatesh STA B DMRL  B Tech Civil   7.3.2012
  4. Sh. B Baludu, TO A RCI,   B Tech Mech  7.3.2012

Acquired from  MAHARSHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY, ROHTAK

  1. Sh U Maheshwarn, STA C DIPR  M Sc,CS  3.9.2009
  2. Sh Deepak Kumar, STA B DESIDOC  M Sc,CS 31.3.2010
  3. Smt Laxmi Verma, STA C DESIDOC   M Sc,CS 20.09.2011
  4. Sh Puneet Kumar, STA C DESIDOC  M Sc,CS 30.09.2011
  5.  Sh Mandeep Singh Basra, STA B IRDE  M Sc,CS 30.09.2012

Acquired from ANNA UNIVERSITY, CHENNAI

  1. Sh R Anandh, STA B CVRDE   BTech E &C E   1.12. 2010
  2. Sh S Purshotham, STA B CVRDE   BTech Mech 1.12. 2010

Acquired from  ANDHRA UNIVERSITY, Visakhapatnam

  1. Sh Ankam Sreekar, STA B,  SFC BTech E&EE  28.2.2011
  2.  Sh Ram Prakash Yadava, STA B , SFC  BTech Chem  9.2.2011
  3. Sh U Thanigaivelan, STA C , HEMRL BTech Chem  28.2.2011
  4. Sh P V Krushna Rao, STA C NSTL  BTech Chem 12.8.2011
  5. Sh M Mahesh, STA C NSTL   B.Tech Mech 22.8.2012
  6. Sh K V Ranga Rao, TO C NSTL  BTech Chem  8.8.2012
  7. Sh V Venkateshwarlu, STA C, NSTL  B.Tech Mech 23.2.2013

Acquired from JRN University, Rajasthan

  1. Sh Rakesh Kumar Soni, STA C  BTech Chem 13.7.2012
  2.  Sh Shankar K N, STA C LRDE  B.Tech  Mech 12.1.2013
  3. Sh Amit Chawla, STA B LASTEC  B.Tech EC&Ein 16.8.2012

Acquired from Sikkim Manipal University, Gangtok

  1. Smt.Sampaty Senapati,  STA ‘C’ ITR M Sc, CS 9.8.2013
  2. Smt Balbir Kaur, TO  C  RAC   M Sc, CS 10.5.2013
  3. Sh Narendra Kumar Thakur, TO C SASE acquired M Sc, CS 24.1.2012
  4. Sh Srinivas Juluru, TO B DRDL  M Sc, CS 1.5.2006
  5. Sh Arvind Kumar, STA B INMAS   M Sc, 25.9.2012

Note : Matter is directly related to corruption and not exempted under Section 24 (1) as a proof the RTI replies and DOP, DRDO letter is enclosed

Regards

Prabhu  Dandriyal,
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun -248008

Registration Number         MODEF/R/2014/61246

Drdo

DRDO Hqrs Not Having Capabilities to Manage Fake/ Unrecognized Diploma /Degree Business – VI

1 Comment
To,                                                                                   7th February 2014
Dr. RB Sharma, CPIO,
DRDO HQ, Min. of Defence,
DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg,
New Delhi-110011                             

Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in respect to  your RTI reply RTI/01/2091/P/2013/0387 dated 27th December 2013 regarding  on acquiring higher qualification by DRDO officials at their own. As per details provide by DRDO RTI cell the following DRDO official acquired their qualification from Janardan Rai Nagar Rajasthan Vidyapeeth University. As per Orissa High Court order in respect of W.P.(c) No. 16718 of 2013 1 & Misc. Case No. 15613 of 2013 Tirthabasi Pradhan vs Union of India on 6 September, 2013

Stated that  “ genuineness of his B.Tech degree is doubted. The Diploma awarded by JRN University, through Distance Education mode has not been approved by UGC, AICTE and DEC as required by the meeting dated 04.06.2009 held at 11 A.M. in the Board Room of IGNOU Maidan Garhri.  

The petitioner failed to produce any letter of approval issued by the Joint Committee jointly signed by the Secretary, UGC, Member Secretary AICTE and Director DEC in respect of courses offered by JRN University, Rajasthan.

Refer to DOP&T O.M. No. 1/2/89 – Estt. (Pay-I) dated 9-4-1999 para -3

“The qualifications meriting grant of incentive should be recognised by the All India Council for Technical Education, Department of Electronics, Deemed University, University or recognised by the Government”

In view of the above, the petitioner is not entitled to get any interim protection and accordingly the misc. case is dismissed.

  1. Sh Rakesh Kumar Soni, STA ‘C’   acquired B.Tech (Chemical Engineering)  from  JRN University, Rajasthan, date of grant 13 July 2012 Sno.79 of RTI reply No RTI/01/2091/P/2013 dated 27 Dec 2013.
  2. Sh Shankar K N, STA ‘C’ LRDE acquired B.Tech (Mechanical Engineering) in 12 Jan 2013 from  JRN University, Rajasthan.
  3. Sh Amit Chawla, STA ‘B’ LASTEC acquired B.Tech (Electro & Comm Engineering) in 16 August 2012 from  JRN University, Rajasthan (Till date Sh Amit Chawla has not submit any proof of appearing B.Tech like any Fee receipt, any date sheet, any leave records for appearing examination etc.)

In respect of above please provide following information.

  1. The certified copy of verification before approving lump sum grant of incentive to above officials.
  2. Certified copy of recommendation for lump sum grant of incentive received by competent authority from their respective establishments.

Note : Matter is directly related to corruption and not exempted under Section 24 (1)

Regards
Prabhu  Dandriyal,
21-Sunderwala, Raipur,
Phone 0135- 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,  

 

Registration Number            MODEF/R/2014/60251

Orissa High Court

Tirthabasi Pradhan vs Union of India on 6 September, 2013

W.P.(c) No. 16718 of 2013 1

Misc. Case No. 15613 of 2013

Para

In the case of Parshavnath Charitable Trust & Ors. Vs. AICTE & Ors., (2013) 3 SCC 385, the petitioner is not entitled to any interim relief. Assuming that the petitioner is eligible to take admission in M.Tech, such admission cannot be granted after the cutoff date, i.e., after 15.08.2013. But fact remains that the petitioner is not eligible to take admission in M.Tech. course as genuineness of his B.Tech degree is doubted. The Diploma awarded by JRN University, through Distance Education mode has not been approved by UGC, AICTE and DEC as required by the meeting dated 04.06.2009 held at 11 A.M. in the Board Room of IGNOU Maidan Garhri. The AICTE has already published a Public Notice for existing students/prospective students pursuing/wanting to pursue the education through Distance Mode under AICTE, UGC and DEC, thereby advising to check the approval by Joint Committee of DEC, UGC and AICTE in the Web Portal of AICTE. If the institution has not been approved by the Joint Committee, the qualifications acquired by the students of such institution are not approved by the AICTE. It is the public policy of the AICTE not to recognize such Certificates acquired by the students as per the aforesaid Notification.

The Deemed University concerned in the present case does not have the recognition from joint Committee consisting of UGC, AICTE and DEC after 2005. Moreover, the JRN University does not have AICTE approval for the programmes/courses offered by it in technical/professional subjects which are exclusively covered under the AICTE Act, 1987. Unless the programmes/courses are approved by AICTE, the BPUT cannot accept such courses and allow the students to enter into the BPUT system to prosecute their higher studies. Apparently, the courses and programmes taken by the student from JRN University is incomplete and the degrees/diplomas/ certificates issued by such University are all defective and illegal.

12 (b) Secondly, the minutes of the meeting on the issue of recognition of diploma awarded by JRN University by Distance Education Council held on 4.6.2009, inter alia, contains the following :

“The AICTE nominee informed that they have not recognized the diploma in engineering course offered by JRN Rajasthan Vidyapeetha. Further the AICTE nominee informed the members that AICTE does not accord recognition to technical programmes offered through distance mode and till date they have got (sic) given any approval to start any technical programme through distance education. AICTE Council has recommended not to start any programme through distance education except MBA, MCA and DBM.”

The minutes of the meeting further contains the relevant Clause of the MoU signed between UGC, AICTE and DEC as under :

” Based on the recommendations of Joint

Committee, the letter of approval may be issued by the Joint Committee. The letter should explicitly state. This has the approval of UGC/AICTE and DEC. The letter should be jointly signed by Secretary, UGC Member Secretary, AICTE and Director, DEC.”

The petitioner failed to produce any letter of approval issued by the Joint Committee jointly signed by the Secretary, UGC, Member Secretary AICTE and Director DEC in respect of courses offered by JRN University, Rajasthan.

9. Law is well-settled that education is national wealth. Merit and excellence assume special significance in the context of professional studies. Selection for admission is necessarily to be merit based. Merit of the student is sole criteria and there is no substitution of it.

10. In view of the above, the petitioner is not entitled to get any interim protection and accordingly the misc. case is dismissed.

B.N. Mahapatra,J.

ssd