Tag Archives: Room No – 104

Drdo

Regarding Backdoor Entry of Scientists

26 Comments

To                                                                                               29th March 2105                             Sh Manohar Parrikar,                                                                                                                       Defence Minister,                                                                                                                               Room No 104, South Block,                                                                                                             New Delhi -110011

Subject: Dr A K Gupta, Ex Director, IRDE helped in Backdoor Entry of Scientists in IRDE, DRDO, Dehradun

Sir,                                                                                                                                                               DRDO having unlimited example of manipulations in recruitments of scientists because of RAC. In beginning of 2000  when Dr W Selvamurty managed the post of CC R&D (HR) inspite of life sciences man which is not the core of DRDO. He create all nonsense in HR, promotions/postings/ recruitments are become business in DRDO.

The result was DRDO involved in lot of court cases till date DRDO paying his all mischiefs and his groomed scientists are sitting in various important posts and carrying all manipulations  like Dr A K Singh, DOP and Dr R K Jain, Director, RAC. The chelas of   Dr W Selvamurty squeeze DRDO in all means these adventures were sensed by ex defence minister and recommended CBI inquiry and advice recruitment of scientists  should again given to UPSC.

Sir, in your reply of question No 789 in Loksabha that DRDO having shortage of more than 1200 scientists. It is wrong input supplied by DRDO in each and every lab more than 30% scientists are involved in admin allied work means almost 1800, the best part is that for financial benefits they shows the scientific contribution and it is totally false it can be verified anytime.

Sir, lot of scientists are not having work of their expertise and they are posted only for satisfaction of ego of Directors,DGs, DOP etc.

The following enclosed letter is received by website and forwarding you to investigate the truth behind the inputs.

Regards

Prabhu Dandriyal,
21-Sunderwala, Raipur,                                                                                                                     Phone 0135- 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,                                                                                 e-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com  website www.corruptionindrdo.com

Enclosed : Letter received by website www.corruptionindrdo.com irde letter regarding scientists appointmentirde letter regarding scientists appointment1 irde letter regarding scientists appointment2

Drdo

Continuously Manipulations in recruitment of scientists in Recruitment and Assessment Centre (RAC), Ministry of Defence, (DRDO).

10 Comments

To                                                                                                          24th  March 2015

Hon’ble Shri Manohar Parrikar,                                                                                                      Defence Minister,                                                                                                                              Room No -104, South Block,                                                                                                            New Delhi-110011

Subject: Continuously Manipulations in recruitment of scientists in Recruitment and Assessment Centre (RAC), Ministry of Defence, (DRDO).
Sir,

  1. Since last 10 years lot of complaints were received by defence ministry regarding the manipulation, nepotism, recruitment of incompetent candidates by RAC, DRDO
  2. Country already witnessed the degradation of DRDO output in several field including Kargil War and one of the major reason of downfall is below standard recruitments done by RAC.
  3. After intervention of Ex Defence Minister 2 scientists recruitment was annulled by DRDO and more are in queue, same time minister also recommended vide Diary No. 14320 dated 24/102013 for CBI enquiry against 10 senior top scientists including two Ex SA to RM and also advice to rethink recruitment through UPSC to avoid all nonsense activities doing by RAC.
  4. Dr. RK Jain, when he was mere Sc F, appointed Director, RAC, w.e.f. 1 March 2009. Without doing science he was promoted Sc ‘G then Sc H in 2013 ignoring GOI order of FCS.
  5. RK Jain’s expertise are utilizing by most of Directors for nepotism and for other vested interest.
  6. Recently Dr S C Sati, Director, ADRDE, Agra pushing a privilege to his loyal multidimensional, multitalented, supporting  Ade Sh Vikas B Thakre, Sc F by helping him to recruit his wife Dr. Vandana V Thakre for the post of scientist E in DRDO.
  7. A tailor made post was advertised with help of great manipulator Dr R K Jain for Dr. Vandana V Thakre, Interview is already completed, as per sources the selection was finalized within day or two it will be declare by RAC.
  8. Presently Dr. Vandana V Thakre is working as associate professor in Madhav Institute of Technology and Science, Gwalior and Dr Sc Sati’s son Akshat is perusing his engineering in her guidance.
  9. I think Sh Vikas B Thakre, Sc F inspired by Dr A K Sikdar, Sceitist G, HEMRL, Pune that his involved in writing/reviewing of his own wife Dr.Nirmla Sikdar, Scientist F and reporting her husband since last five years. Anything can happen in DRDO
  10. These all involved scientists are not learn a lesson from Dr Arun Kumar, Ex DOP’s last minute suspension, his daughter;s 10 year service annulling, Dr. S M Veerabhadrappa, Director, DTRL charge sheeted and facing Departmental proceeding, Mrs T Chandrabanu, Sc F service annulled, Ms S Geetha, Sc D, DIPAS and Ms Dolly Bansal both are in queue, any time their service will be terminated. The queue is very long.
  11. I would like to congratulate through you to Dr Vandana V Thakre, Sh Vikas B Thakre, Dr S C Sati and Dr R K Jain follow the footsteps of great corrupt Dr Arun Kumar, Dr W Selvamurthy etc.

Sir, we feel that in Modi ji era and your special selection as defence minister everyone in country start hopping that now the corruption/nepotism/favoritism will be end. The two major steps like termination of Sh Avinash Chander, and order for review and hold his last moment orders are giving us  some light rays.

With great expectations of corrective measures.

Regards

Prabhu Dandriyal                                                                                                                                21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun- 248001                                                                               Ph   0135 2787750, Mobile 9411114879,

e-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com  website   www.corruptionindrdo.com

Drdo

Regarding 25 questions asked by government for improving DRDO.

12 Comments

To                                                                                            11th March 2015

Hon’ble Shri Manohar Parrikar,                                                                                     Defence Minister,                                                                                                                    Room No -104, South Block,                                                                                                           New Delhi-110011

SUBJECT:   Regarding 25 questions asked by government for improving DRDO.

Sir,

Government is putting his whole heartedly efforts to improve the DRDO in the interest of defence preparedness and properly utilization of govt. fund as well as the turning DRDO in delivering mode. Government floated 25 questions to understand the DRDO problems that why after spending so huge amount not able to deliver single 100% indigenous system.

Unfortunately, government is seeking answer from those who are the responsible for gutted DRDO in this stage. How can they accept their incompetency, they are not so generous because they were not even take seriously KARGIL WAR failures. The Gen Malik openly told the country    “We had one or two incidents particularly on the weapon-locating radar. If the DRDO had not come in the way we would have got them before the Kargil war and that would have definitely reduced our casualties,” he told Karan Thapar on Devil’s Advocate programme on CNN-IBN.

One question out of 25 questiosn is – What DRDO is doing to make quality scientific manpower pool larger than what is available, to make it much more competent and qualitative, and what kind of facilities and infrastructure DRDO provide to scientific community including their pay, facilities and other things? – Action CC R&D (HR)

I don’t know what DRDO submitted against this question but yesterday I have received a good real analytical input from one of DRDO establishment ACEM, Nashik. Which can an eye opener for Ministry of Defence to see the real cause of DRDO failure?

Although the received letter is not having sign but as per sources all information are true and it can be verified by not from GM but from each and every officials/ employees of ACEM.

It is requested that listen the voice of young scientists although they are serving for their livelihood but same time want to contribute to nation with their full knowledge and ability but unfortunately DRDO management is rotten that the young scientists simply wasting their energy and time.

With hope our great IITan Shri Parrikar ji will this issue with honest and eligible scientists and use the scientific potential in right direction.

Regards

Prabhu  Dandriyal                                                                                                                       21-Sunderwala, Raipur,                                                                                        DehradunPh   0135 2787750, Mobile 9411114879,

e-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com  website   www.corruptionindrdo.com

letter newletter1 newletter2 newletter3 newenvelop

Drdo

Sh Avinash Chander’s, DG, DRDO, SA to RM, Secretary, DRD, Contractual Appointment

2 Comments
To                                                                                                         2nd December 2014
Hon’ble Shri Manohar Parrikar,
Defence Minister,
Room No 104, South Block, MoD,
New Delhi-110011

SUBJECT : DRDO CHIEF ON CONTRACT

REFERENCE

  1. Letter No. 12/9/2013-EO(SM-I), Government of India, Secretariat of the Appointment Committee of Cabinet, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions , dated 31 May 2013 regarding The appointment of Shri Avinash Chander beyond his date of retirement i.e. 30.1 1.2014 on contract basis.
  2. Print Release, Press Information Bureau, Government of India, Ministry of Defence, 28November2014 18:48 IST

Hon’ble Sir,

With regards, I would like to draw your kind attention towards letters under reference. The press release of PIB, MOD is regarding – Avinash Chander to Continue as DRDO Chief on Contract after Superannuation.

Following facts are conclusive form the above letters.

  1. A contractual retired employee (employee on contract) is now DRDO Chief.
  2. By which Order, The President is pleased to retire Dr. Avinash Chander, Secretary, Department of Defence Research & Development in the Ministry of Defence from Government Service with effect from 30.11.2014 (AN) on attaining the age of superannuation. Why the said Order was not disclosed by MOD?
  3. The Order dated 31 May 2013 was issued by previous Government and this Government has issued orders for retirement of Shri Avinash Chander.
  4. There is no fresh order issued by this Government regarding contract of Shri Avinash Chander as DRDO Chief.

Questions

  1. Government is emphasizing on young Scientist in the DRDO on the other hand despite being several talented and experienced scientists available in DRDO, what is necessity and compulsions of a retired person as DRDO Chief.
  2. How a person on contract will enjoy administrative and financial powers while DRDO is having 30000 employees and Rs. 15283 crore budget?
  3. Will they have to report a contractual employee?
  4. How an employee on contract be Head of Department and Head of Office in DRDO.
  5. Would Ministry of Defence could not find any suitable scientist as DRDO Chief out of 7500 talented scientists in DRDO or from other organisations.
  6. Why Government is not maintaining Transparency in the appointment on contract and powers being exercised by Shri Avinash Chander after superannuation. All RTI replies returned under section 24 of RTI Act 2005
  7. Government has cancelled many appointments of previous Government but why not of Shri Avinash Chander while several complaints are pending before the Government against him.
  8. Can a man of doubtful integrity be appointed on contract basis as DRDO Chief? The case of Dr Arun Kumar’s daughter’s recruitment where Sh Avinash Chander give clean chit and after CVC/CVO, MoD intervention the said recruitment was found illegal and cancelled.
  9. Farzi EDK MoU in US propaganda till date nothing has been done, only Ms Reny enjoying the US trips, what India got from this MoU except spending crores of tax payers money and Sh Avinash Chander’s photo session with Ms Fay Crowe, her mother, her sister and her daughter.

Sir, on behalf of Government would you like to reply to the nation being a technocrat-cum-politician, how much it is justified to have DRDO Chief on contract basis for one and half year.

The scientific community and employees are very much surprised from this decision of Government and this will lead frustration among the scientific community of DRDO. In the interest of nation and the DRDO, I kindly request  to you to remove the Shri Avinash Chander as DRDO Chief and setup High Level Committee to inquire all the complaints against   Shri Avinash Chander pending before the Government (PMO & MOD)

Regards

Prabhu  Dandriyal,
21-Sunderwala, Raipur,
Phone 0135- 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,
e-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com  website www.corruptionindrdo.com

Copy enclosed:

  1. Appointment Letter dated 31 May 2013
  2. Press Release, PIB, MOD dated 28.11.2014sa-appointment-letter

Press Information Bureau
Government of India
Ministry of Defence
28-November-2014 18:48 IST

Avinash Chander to Continue as DRDO Chief on Contract After Superannuation

The President is pleased to retire Dr. Avinash Chander, Secretary, Department of Defence Research & Development (DOB: 06.11.1950), in the Ministry of Defence from Government Service with effect from 30.11.2014 (AN) on attaining the age of superannuation.

The appointment of Dr. Avinash Chander beyond his date of retirement i.e. 30.11.2014 for 18 months would be on contract basis, with the same terms and conditions as he would be entitled to Secretary (DRD) before the date of retirement. His contractual term will end on 31 May 2016.

N Ao/DM/HH

Drdo

Each Directors of DRDO Labs is King/ Queen of Small Kingdom

27 Comments
To                                                                                            17th November 2014
Hon’ble
Shri Manohar Parrikar,
Defence Minister,
Room No -104, South Block,
New Delhi-110011

 

SUBJECT:  DRDO Directors running DRDO Labs as their Dynasty 

Sir,

It appears that Dr. Shashi Bala Singh, Director, DIPAS, DRDO running Lab as her dynasty.

“Each Directors of DRDO Labs is King/ Queen of Small Kingdom”

Dr Gausal Azam Khan, young energetic life sciences scientist’s research paper was selected for “Developing World Scientist Award” by XXIII Congress of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemotasis, Kyoto, Japan.(July 23-28, 2014)

As per DRDO procedure Dr Khan submitted all required documents and requested to allow him to attend above conference well in advance.

However, he was discriminated being a minority because and has not been allowed to attend conference, Dr. Shashi Bala Singh, Director, DIPAS till date not furnished any logical /acceptable reason for denial.

Last movement a senior scientist who was very well understand the DRDO culture advised

Dr Khan who was joined DRDO direct scientist ‘D’ via NRI scheme in 2009 and does not aware the DRDO flattery culture only believes in research  but in last movement a senior scientist who was very well understand the DRDO culture advised to make it personal visit and get NOC.

The advised worked and Dr Khan got NOC and he went Japan.

Dr. Shashi Bala Singh, Director, DIPAS took it personally and by unconstitutionally without taking consent from competent authority i.e DG, DRDO she wrote email to organization committee and inquired unethical manner regarding Dr Khan’s where about, when he reached, where he stays, what he received award/finance etc.

Is very shame to DRDO that Dr. Shashi Bala Singh, Director, DIPAS was spread a message to all international research family that there are no harmony/ understanding/ team spirit/good faith among the DRDO scientists.

Following enclosed emails from Dr. Shashi Bala Singh, Director, DIPAS to executive director of organizing committee speaks a volume.

  1. Whether GOI/ DRDO Hqrs permit any director to write such mails/letter to ask individual’s personal where about, when he was in personal capacity visit.

In case of Dr Khan when he applied official he was denied means for DRDO matter closed. It attracts penalty for breach of confidentiality and privacy.

  1. Whether GOI/DRDO hrqs allow to directors who are demoralizing the young scientists, other hand the government asked DRDO “What DRDO is doing to make quality scientific manpower pool larger then what is available, to make it much more competent and qualitative, and what kind of facilities and infrastructure DRDO provide to scientific community including their pay and facilities, other things? (CC R&D, HR).
  2. A board has recommended Dr GA Khan entry in DRDO as Scientist ‘D’ in NRI scheme, being a dedicated and hard working scientist, he has made his own space in the field, recognize internationally. Instead of encouraging such manpower DRDO Hqrs appears to discriminate the scientist on the basis of cast & creed by backing the Dr. Shashi Bala Singh, Director, DIPAS.

Sir, it is requested to find out, whether Dr. Shashi Bala Singh  Director, DIPAS could obtain permission from Sh Avinash Chander, DG, DRDO to write such emails which reflects the mistrust among the colleagues and spying of own scientist. This act of shame is being talked with different; they surprised to see the downfall of DRDO scientific culture.

Regards
 
Prabhu  Dandriyal
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun
Ph   0135 2787750, Mobile 9411114879,
e-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com  website   www.corruptionindrdo.com

 

Enclosed – Emails of Dr. Shashi Bala Singh, Director, DIPAS written to organization committee of XXIII Congress of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemotasis, Kyoto, Japan.(July 23-28, 2014)

email 1 Dr Shahsi Bala Singh

 

email Dr Shahsi Bala Singh

 

email Dr Shahsi Bala Singh2

email Dr Shahsi Bala Singh21

 

 

Drdo

Breach of trust, criminal misconduct and gross violation of CCS (Conduct) Rules 1964 to misguide Hon’ble Defence Minister by Dr. A.K. Singh, Director (Personnel) , DRDO HQ, New Delhi.

20 Comments
To                                                                                            14th November 2014
Hon’ble
Shri Manohar Parrikar,
Defence Minister,
Room No -104, South Block,
New Delhi-110011

 

SUBJECT: Breach of trust, criminal misconduct and gross violation of CCS (Conduct) Rules 1964 to misguide Hon’ble Defence Minister by Dr. A.K. Singh, Director (Personnel) , DRDO HQ, New Delhi.

Hon’ble Sir,

I would like to draw your kind attention towards mischievous acts of Dr. A.K. Singh, Director (Personnel), DRDO HQ who is Scientist ‘G’  belonging to Life Sciences discipline. Though renowned Nuclear Medicine Scientist he is posted in Directorate related to HR like Staff Officer to CCR&D, Director, CEPTAM, DHRD and DOP since the year 2004. He has no knowledge and understanding of HR, Government Rules and Government Orders rather he is expert in manipulation of rules short term gains. Former Hon’ble Defence Minister, himself a renowned lawyer of India was mislead by Dr. A.K. Singh, Director (Personnel), DRDO resulted day by several court cases against DRDO in various courts across the country. Dr. A.K. Singh, Director (Personnel), DRDO is solely responsible for humiliation to DRDO, waste expenditure of public money and trouble to innocent scientists and employees of DRDO.

Due to this DRDO derailed from real task i.e. development of weapon technologies and most of top senior officials busy to tackle court cases and country’s precious time wasted on court formalities and height of this is CC (R&D) HR, DRDO fighting to save himself from jail punishment and wasting poor taxpayers money by engaging 4 top lawyers.

Hon’ble Sir, being an honest and simple person you are traveling in economy class to save public money but senior scientists of DRDO including Dr. A.K. Singh are enjoying business class travel and collecting flying points for family members.

Brief Facts of the Case

  1. A.K. Singh, Director (Personnel) issued Order No. MON.GP/120576/M/01 dated 10 October 2014 by which states that “Competent Authority has come to the conclusion that the appointment of Ms. Swati Srivastava, Scientist ‘B’ (now Scientist ‘C’ ) in DRDO is irregular ab initio. Therefore , the President being the Competent Authority has dispensed with the requirement of holding another enquiry  and has decided to annul the appointment of said Ms.  Swati Srivastava, Scientist ‘B’ (now Scientist ‘C’) in DRDO with immediate effect invoking the provisions of DOP&T OM No. 11012/7/91-Estt. (A) dated 19.05.1993 read with the Rule 19(ii) of CCS(CCA) Rules 1965“. Copy of the Order dated 10 October 2014 is enclosed as Annexure-1.
  2. Therefore it is pertinent to understand the provisions of said DOPT OM dated 19.05.1993 and Rule 19(ii) of CCS(CCA) Rules 1965.

DOP&T OM No. 11012/7/91-Estt. (A) dated 19.05.1993

Action against Government servants to be taken if they are later found ineligible or unqualified for their initial recruitment –

Attention of the Ministries/Departments is invited to Ministry of Home Affairs OM No. 39/1/67- Ests.(A) dated 21.02.1967 wherein it was clarified that departmental action can be taken against Government servant in respect of misconduct committed before his employment. Attention is also invited to the Ministry of Home Affairs OM No. 5/1/63-Estt. (D) dated 30.04.1965 wherein Ministries/Departments were requested to make use of the provision of ‘warning’ inserted in the Attestation Form for taking action against Government servant furnishing false information at the time of appointment.

  1. A question has now arisen as to whether a Government Servant can be discharged from service where it is discovered later that the Government servant was not qualified or eligible for his initial recruitment in service. The Supreme Court in its judgment in the District Collector, Vizianagram vs. M. Tripura Sundari Devi (1990(4) SLR 237 went into this issue and observed as under :-

“It must further be realized by all concerned that when an advertisement mentions a particular qualification and an appointment is made in disregard of the same, it is not a matter only between the appointing authority and the appointee concerned. The aggrieved are all those who had similar or better qualifications than the appointee or appointees but who had not applied for the post because they did not possess the qualifications mentioned in the advertisement. It amounts to a fraud on public to appoint a person with inferior qualifications in such circumstances unless it is clearly stated that the qualifications are relaxable. No Court should be a party to the perpetuation of the fraudulent practice.”

The matter has been examined in consultation with the Ministry of Law and Justice and it has now been decided that wherever it is found that a Government servant, who was not qualified or eligible in terms of the recruitment rules etc, for initial recruitment in service or had furnished false information or produced a false certificate in order to secure appointment, he should not be retained in service. If he is a probationer or a temporary Government servant, he should be discharged or his services should be terminated. If he has become a permanent Government servant, an inquiry as prescribed in Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 may be held and if the charges are proved, the Government servant should be removed or dismissed from service. In no circumstances should any other penalty be imposed.

  1. Such discharge, termination, removal or dismissal from service would, however, be without prejudice to the right of the Government to prosecute such Government servants.

[Deptt. Of Personnel & Training OM No. 11012/7/91-Estt. (A) dated 19.05.1993]

Rule 19 of CCS(CCA) Rules 1965

Special procedure in certain cases

Notwithstanding anything contained in rule 14 to rule 18-

(i) where any penalty is imposed on a Government servant on the ground of conduct which has led to his conviction on a criminal charge, or

(ii) where the disciplinary authority is satisfied for reasons to be recorded by it in writing that it is not reasonably practicable to hold an inquiry in the manner provided in these rules,

or

(iii) where the President is satisfied that in the interest of the security of the State, it is not expedient to hold any inquiry in the manner provided in these rules, the disciplinary authority may consider the circumstances of the case and make such orders thereon as it deems fit:

Provided that the Government servant may be given an opportunity of making representation on the penalty proposed to be imposed before any order is made in a case under clause (i):

Provided further that the Commission shall be consulted, where such consultation is necessary, before any orders are made in any case under this rule.

 

  1. Mere reading of the provisions of said OM dated 19.05.1993 stipulates that:
  2. If he has become a permanent Government servant, an inquiry as prescribed in Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 may be held.
  3. if the charges are proved, the Government servant should be removed or dismissed from service.
  • In no circumstances should any other penalty be imposed.
  1. All the above three provisions of said OM dated 19.05.1993 were grossly violated in Order No. MON.GP/120576/M/01 dated 10 October 2014 issued by Dr. A.K. Singh under planned conspiracy and mischief the Hon’ble Defence Minister. The major irregularities and facts related to the Order dated 10 October 2014 to annul the appointment of Ms. Swati Srivastava, Scientist ‘C’ are as under:
  2. It is quite obvious from order that charges of illegal appointment on Ms. Swati Srivastava was established as she was not having requisite qualification and submitted false information at time of her initial recruitment.
  3. She became permanent employee of DRDO in past ten years after his appointment in DRDO.
  • In case of permanent employee if the charges are proved, the Government servant should be removed or dismissed from service.
  1. In no circumstances should any other penalty be imposed.
  2. To annul the appointment is totally illegal as there is no such provision to annul the appointment in CCS(CCA) Rules 1965.
  3. Ms. Swati Srivastava was recruited in DRDO for post of Scientist ‘B’ and the case is of recruitment of Ms. Swati Srivastava as Scientist ‘B’.
  • The DOPT OM No. 11012/7/91-Estt. (A) dated 19.05.1993 deals with “Action against Government servants to be taken if they are later found ineligible or unqualified for their initial recruitment”. The whole case of Ms. Swati Srivastava , Scientist ‘C’ was related to her illegal initial recruitment not the appointment.
  • A. K. Singh, DOP mentioned illegal recruitment as irregular appointment.
  1. Inquiry under Rule 14 of CCS(CCA) Rules 1965 was knowingly dispensed/dropped by misusing Rule 19(2) so that penalty of dismissal or removal should not be imposed upon Ms. Swati Srivastava by Dr. A. K. Singh, DOP by DRDO.
  2. Whole exercise and conspiracy was planned by Dr. A. K. Singh , DOP to patronage and protect the interest of Ms. Swati Srivastava , Scientist ‘C’.
  3. Illegal order dated 10 October 2014 was knowingly issued by Dr. A. K. Singh , DOP so that Ms. Swati Srivastava , Scientist ‘C’ can challenge the order dated 10 October 2014 to annul her appointment and come back in DRDO based on court order.
  4. Establishing the above narrated facts, Ms. Swati Srivastava , Scientist ‘C’ moved to Principal Bench of Central Administrative Tribunal vide A./3809/2014 with first hearing on 12.11.2014. Copy of cause list of 12.11.2014 , CAT, New Delhi is attached for ready reference.
  5. Therefore in the interest of DRDO and public of the nation justice should be meted out as per Law and following actions are requested to your honest and transparent office.
  6. Order for dismissal or removal from service of Ms. Swati Srivastava, Scientist ‘C’ should be issued as per obligation of the DOP&T OM 11012/7/91-Estt. (A) Dated 19.05.1993.
  7. A.K. Singh, Director(Personnel) should immediately be removed from post of Director(Personnel) and proper high level inquiry should be conducted for his role in nepotism , conspiracy, breach of trust,violations of conduct rules and wastage of public money.
  8. As all four cases of Recruitment Scam is under probe of CBI vide CVO, MOD note approved by former Hon’ble Defence Minister Sri A.K. Antony on 29.10.2013, therefore this irregularity and misconduct for nepotism by Dr. K. Singh, Director(Personnel) should be referred to CBI to investigate role of Dr. A.K. Singh in issuance of such illegal order dated 10 Oct 2014 to favour Ms. Swati Srivastava, Scientist ‘C’.

 

Regards
 
Prabhu  Dandriyal,
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun,
Ph   0135 2787750, Mobile 9411114879,
e-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com  website   www.corruptionindrdo.comswati srivastava annuling order page 1
swati srivastava annuling order page 2
swati srivastava annuling order page 3
swati srivastava annuling order page 4
swati srivastava CAT case OA Number
 

 

(10) Action against Government servants to be taken if they are later found ineligible or

unqualified for their initial recruitment –

Attention of the Ministries/Departments is invited to Ministry of Home Affairs OM No. 39/1/67-Ests.(A) dated 21.02.1967 wherein it was clarified that departmental action can be taken against Government servant in respect of misconduct committed before his employment. Attention is also invited to the Ministry of Home Affairs OM No. 5/1/63-Estt. (D) dated 30.04.1965 where in Ministries/Departments were requested to make use of the provision of ‘warning’ inserted in the Attestation Form for taking action against Government servant furnishing false information at the time of appointment.

  1. A question has now arisen as to whether a Government Servant can be discharged from service where it is discovered later that the Government servant was not qualified or eligible for his initial recruitment in service. The Supreme Court in its judgment in the District Collector,Vizianagram vs. M. Tripura Sundari Devi (1990(4) SLR 237 went into this issue and observed asunder :-

“It must further be realized by all concerned that when an advertisement mentions a particular qualification and an appointment is made in disregard of the same, it is not a matter only between the appointing authority and the appointee concerned. The aggrieved are all those who had similar or better qualifications than the appointee or appointees but who had not applied for the post because they did not possess the qualifications mentioned in the advertisement. It amounts to a fraud on public to appoint a person with inferior qualifications in such circumstances unless itis clearly stated that the qualifications are relaxable. No Court should be a party to the perpetuation of the fraudulent practice.”

The matter has been examined in consultation with the Ministry of Law and Justice and it has now been decided that wherever it is found that a Government servant, who was not qualified or eligible in terms of the recruitment rules etc, for initial recruitment in service or had furnished false information or produced a false certificate in order to secure appointment, he should not be retained in service. If he is a probationer or a temporary Government servant, he should be discharged or his services should be terminated. If he has become a permanent Government servant, an inquiry as prescribed in Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 may be held and if the charges are proved, the Government servant should be removed or dismissed from service. In no circumstances should any other penalty be imposed.

  1. Such discharge, termination, removal or dismissal from service would, however, be without prejudice to the right of the Government to prosecute such Government servants.

[Deptt. Of Personnel & Training OM No. 11012/7/91-Estt. (A) dated 19.05.1993]

 

Action against Government Servants who get appointment on the basis of false SC/ST/OBC certificates.

No.36011/1/2012-Estt. (Res.)
Government of India
Department of Personnel and Training
Establishment (Reservation) Section
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Dated the 10th January, 2013.
OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Sub:- Action against Government servants who get appointment on the basis of false SC/ST/OBC certificates.

The undersigned is directed to invite reference to this Department’s OM No.11012/7/91-Estt.(A) dated 19.5.1993 which provides as under:-

“Wherever it is found that a Government servant, who was not qualified or eligible in terms of the recruitment rules etc., for initial recruitment in service or had furnished false information or produced a false certificate in order to secure appointment, he should not be retained in service. If, he is probationer or a temporary Government servant, he should be discharged or his services should be terminated. If he has become a permanent Government servant, an inquiry as prescribed in Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 may be held and if the charges are proved, the Government servant should be removed or dismissed from service. In no circumstances should any penalty be imposed”.

  1. The position was reiterated vide this Department’s OM No.42011/22/2006-Estt.(Res.) dated the 29th March, 2007 that the cases other than those protected by the specific order of the Apex Court should be dealt with in accordance with the instructions contained in the aforesaid O.M. However, it has been observed that disciplinary proceedings in the cases involving appointments on the basis of false/fake caste certificates take considerable time and the persons who have secured employment on the basis of false caste certificates enjoy the benefits of Government service whereas such Government servants should be removed / dismissed from the service at the earliest.
  2. It is requested that disciplinary inquiries involving the matter of securing jobs on the basis of false/fake certificates should be completed in a time bound manner and unscrupulous persons who have got appointment on the basis of fake/ false caste certificates should not be retained in service and should be dismissed / removed thenceforth.
  3. Contents of this OM may be brought to the notice of all concerned.
sd/-
(Sharad Kumar Srivastava)
Under Secretary to the Government of India
Source : www.persmin.nic.in
[http://ccis.nic.in/WriteReadData/CircularPortal/D2/D02adm/36011_1_2012-Estt-Res.pdf]

 

Drdo

Sh Avinash Chander is not interested to take any action on DMSRDE corruption cases

7 Comments
To                                                                                                        1st  November 2014
Hon’ble
Shri Arun Jaitly,
Raksha Mantri,
Room No 104, South Block,
New Delhi-110011

 

SUBJECT:  Sh Avinash Chander is not interested to take any action on DMSRDE corruption cases.

Sir,

I would like to draw your kind attention towards corruption in tunes of crores at Defence Materials & Stores Research & Development Establishment (DMSRDE), Kanpur, an establishment under Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO), Ministry of Defence, Government of India.

Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena was appointed as Scientist ‘C’ on 28.04.1984 in DMSRDE, Kanpur and since then he is continuously posted at DMSRDE, Kanpur since last 30 years. He has not been transferred even for a day from Kanpur and since the date of his posting he is working at Kanpur.  The roots of the Dr. Saxena while working at DMSRDE, Kanpur has become so deep that he was involved in various activities involving the financial & other administrative irregularities.

Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Scientist ‘G’ was appointed as Director, DMSRDE, Kanpur wef 01 January 2011. In spite of the fact that he has been involved in various financial and administrative irregularities , Dr. Saxena was  promoted to the rank of Scientist ‘H’ wef 02 August 2012 and since then he is  holding the rank of Scientist ‘H’ and working as Director, DMSRDE.

The right from his appointment as Director, he was involved in various kinds of administrative & financial irregularities that lead corruption in tunes of crores. Several complaints were made against Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena to then Defence Minister by some scientists of DMSRDE.

Being a RTI activist and social worker running a website corruptionindrdo.com to expose the corruption in DRDO, also made as far as 12 complaints regarding corruption in procurements of various instruments & materials etc in DMSRDE by Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director, DMSRDE to CVC, Hon’ble Defence Minister and DGR&D, DRDO. These complaints were filed during 29 Nov 2013 to 11 June 2014. Total cost of store items procured against which complaints were filed is about Rs. 7.5 crore. A complete list of complaints filed by me to CVC and Hon’ble Defence Minister is annexed as Annexure No. -1.

All the aforesaid complaints made have been endorsed by Central Vigilance Commission (CVC). CVC has taken cognizance of aforesaid complaints and registered on prima facia.  These complaints have been forwarded to Chief Vigilance Office (CVO), Ministry of Defence for further enquiry/investigation of the aforesaid complaints. Under the provisions of RTI Act 2005 the CPIO, CVC vide letter no. CVC/RTI/13/1862/241925 dated 18.03.2014 informed to me that his complaints have been forwarded to CVO (MOD) for investigation.

Under RTI Act, CPIO, CVO MOD informed that all complaints have been forwarded to Director, Vigilance & Security, DRDO for further inquiry and asked the consolidated report from DRDO vide their letter dated 04 August 2014.

Meantime, A FFIC was constituted by Shri Avinash Chander, DG, DRDO to inquire the complaints against Dr. Saxena. The Fact Finding Inquiry Committee visited DMSRDE, Kanpur on 13th – 14th, March 2014 for inquiry on the complaint submitted against Dr. Saxena. The said committee submitted its report to Shri Avinash Chander but no action taken by DRDO against Dr. Saxena, Director.

It is very surprising and interesting that Shri Avinash Chander again set up another four members Fact Finding Inquiry Committee  under chairmanship of Dr. D.C. Pandey, Scientist ‘H’ LRDE and three members Sri Hari Babu Srivastava, Scientist ‘G’, Director, LASTECH, Sri Jagdeep, Scientist ‘F’ and Sri R.S. Mehta, Joint Director. The said committee visited DMSRDE, Kanpur recently on 9-10 July 2014. Therefore constitution of two FFIC by Shri Avinash Chander establishes that there were complaints against Dr. Saxena but to give him patronage and support the Shri Avinash Chander set up illegal FFIC. This second FFIC also submitted its report to Shri Avinash Chander but still no action against Dr. A.K Saxena took place by DRDO.

Interestingly, 31st October in the eve of Vigilance week, Sh. R.S. Mehta, Joint Director, Vigilance, DRDO in his address mentioned to audience that how the corrupt practices adopted by Director, DMSRDE and his team in procurement cases.

Sir, it is not understandable that why Shri Avinash Chander constituted two fact finding committees? Why DRDO is silent on corruption cases of DMSRDE, Kanpur? Why Shri Avinash Chander is protecting Dr. A.K. Saxena?

In light of the above mentioned facts, it is requested that speedy action needed to save precious funds of poor tax payers. Dr A K Saxena openly using same corrupt practices in ongoing procurements cases. He told to his beloved team that Dr. V Bhujanga Rao, DG,NS&IC directed that left Rs 13 crores should be spend up to 31st March 2015 positively.

Regards
 
Prabhu  Dandriyal
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun
Ph   0135 2787750, Mobile 9411114879,
e-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com  website   www.corruptionindrdo.com

Annexure:-

  1. List of complaints/cases filed to CVC and Defence Minister against Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director, DMSRDE, Kanpur

    DMSRDE CVC Cases
    DMSRDE CVC Cases
Drdo

Sharply increasing the number of Court Cases in DRDO

6 Comments
To                                                                                                       1st September 2014
Sh Arun Jaietly Ji,
Defence Minister,
Room No 104, South Block,
New Delhi – 110011

Subject:  Sharply increasing the number of Court Cases in DRDO

Sir,

The DRDO top officials are not bothering the increasing numbers of court cases. It is not linear increase but it is in multifold, from CAT to High Court followed to Supreme Court.

As a learned lawyer you can very well understand the clients mental status when someone involve in court. Scientists or technical official who are engaged in court business than expectation of product output from them is futile.

If you ask your scientific adviser the figure of court cases and court expenses of last five years along with solicitor general’s advices or legal cell advices in which they deny for further move but the ego of DRDO’s top brass are very high.

Sir, you have check the payments to lawyers some time DRDO using project funds illegally and the scientists are also involved to attend court cases in the name of technical discussion in nearby DRDO or other establishment.

In RTI, DRDO will not provide the number of cases running in various courts across the country but certainly you will able to get data of cases and number of scientist and technical officials are involved. Number is alarming i.e. in thousand.

For example one simple case of tenure transfer of scientist is enclosed. In which you can understand the level of ego of senior DRDO officials compel to scientist go to the court and waste his hard earn money and suffer unnecessary. Dr. Vijay Veer, Director, DRL, Tezpur’s ego and his incompetency resulted to this CAT case.

As our Prime Minster said in his 15th August speech that he observed that in ministries department running as their own jagir and this clear cut accurately fit with DRDO working.

With great hope that you will certainly look into the matter and asked to correct this court business in DRDO.

Regards
 
Prabhu Dandriyal
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun-248008
Phone – 0135- 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,
e-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com  website – www.corruptionindrdo.com

Order of CAT Bench Guhwati in DRDO matter
Order of CAT Bench Guhwati in DRDO matter
Order of CAT Bench Guhwati in DRDO matter
Order of CAT Bench Guhwati in DRDO matter
Order of CAT Bench Guhwati in DRDO matter
Order of CAT Bench Guhwati in DRDO matter
Order of CAT Bench Guhwati in DRDO matter
Order of CAT Bench Guhwati in DRDO matter

Dr. A K Singh’s not able to handle DOP matter this is another failure in his part

Drdo

Patriots are vulnerable and easy prey for corrupt officials of DRDO

1 Comment
To                                                                                           24th  February 2014
Sh A K Antony,
Defence Minister,
Room No – 104, South Block,
New Delhi -110011

Subject: Patriots are vulnerable and easy prey for corrupt officials of DRDO

Honorable Sir,

Please find enclosed a representation of Sh G Jupiter of ASL, DRDO, Hyderabad to Sh Ranjit Sinha, IPS, Director, CBI for seeking justice.

Sh G Jupiter helped Intelligence Bureau (IB) to nab the espionage activity of DRDO.

The officer had a meeting with Ms Rosy Sharma then Deputy Secretary, D (R&D) Ministry of Defence on 20th and 21st June 2001.

Sh G Jupiter helped the Government of India to exposed and fixed mafia and spy agent operating in DRDO.

Intelligence Bureau (IB) officer Sh K T Moses has awarded Indian Police Medal for exposing this case, however, Sh G Jupiter was victimized by DRDO for the same act to the extent that he had to approached Honorable Court (CAT) for justice but mighty DRDO did not honor the Honorable Court (CAT) judgment till date and happy to harass a genuine honest patriot.

To maintain the honesty and commitment to the nation, it is requested that this case may please be treated with open heart and the officer should be given justice and his dues the nation woes.

Regards
Prabhu  Dandriyal,
21-Sunderwala, Raipur,
Phone 0135- 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,
e-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com  website www.corruptionindrdo.com

Enclosed –

  1. Letter of Sh G Jupiter address to Sh Ranjit Sinha, Director, CBI
  2. Letter of Ms Rosy Sharma then Deputy Secretary, D (R&D) MoD
    Letter of Sh G Jupiter address to Sh Ranjit Sinha, Director, CBI
    Letter of Sh G Jupiter address to Sh Ranjit Sinha, Director, CBI
    Letter of Sh G Jupiter address to Sh Ranjit Sinha, Director, CBI
    Letter of Sh G Jupiter address to Sh Ranjit Sinha, Director, CBI
    jupter letter2
    Letter of Ms Rosy Sharma then Deputy Secretary, D (R&D) MoD

    Tripoli varsity

    EXPRESS NEWS SERVICE
    HYDERABAD, May 4: Defence Research Development Organisation (DRDO) scientist Srinivasulu, who was nabbed by Intelligence Bureau (IB) officials and city police here on Thursday night, was found to be working as a faculty member in the Tripoli University in Libya.

    IB officials, acting on a tip off, sought the assistance of city police, who arrested the B-grade defence scientist at the Rajiv Gandhi International airport when he was about to board the Dubai-bound Air-India flight.

    According to sources, Srinivasulu neither submitted his resignation nor obtained permission from the DRDO authorities for working in Libya. He obtained a passport without the knowledge of DRDO which is statutory. He left for Libya an year-and-half back and joined as a faculty member in the university at Tripoli.

    During interrogation, Srinivasulu reportedly confessed before IB officials that he was taking some secret documents with him and one of his colleagues at Tripoli university, Kumar, was also involved in the spying.

    Sources added that Srinivasulu has planned to go to Sharjah by the Dubai-bound Indian Airlines flight and then to Malta Islands in Africa by air. From there he was to catch a ship for Tripoli.

    Copyright © 1997 Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd.

  3. kt moses
    SHRI K T MOSES
    ACIO-I, IB,
    HYDERABAD, SIB
    INTELLIGENCE BUREAU
Drdo

DRDO is Weakest link for Spying

3 Comments
To                                                                                           11th February 2014
Sh A K Antony,
Defence Minister,
Room No – 104, South Block,
New Delhi -110011

Subject: DRDO is weakest link for Spying

Honorable Sir,

Sh Rishi Raj (Late) joined. DEAL, DRDO, Raipur Road, Dehradun in June 1982 as Radio Mechanic. He died on 17th January 1991. As per rule the survivor (spouse) was given compensatory appointment on 3rd June 1991.

As per official records of Late Rishi Raj his wife name is   Smt Kailash Devi. His marriage date is 5th May 1977 and he never changed his wife’s name in official records.

After death of Rishi Raj, then DEAL, Director, Sh V P Sandlas forwarded compensatory appointment application on recommendation of board constituted as per laid down directives of government of India.

However, the compensatory appointment was given to Smt Rita as she was submitted a photocopy of affidavit notarized by  Sh V Shahni, court compound, Dehradun, verified by Ms Sheetal, on 6th March 1991 (after death of Sh Rishi Raj) stated that her name was change after marriage as Rita.

Astonishing fact is that Late Rishi Raj married on 5th May 1977 and joined DEAL in June 1982 and at the time of joining in his family details he puts her wife name Smt Kailash Devi.

No mandatory police verification was done by DEAL, Dehradun before giving her appointment.

Surprisingly there is no any original document available in her service records, all available papers like educational certificates /affidavit/ etc are Photostat copies and not even attested by gazetted officer.

Smt Rita retired on 30th September 2013 as senior Admin Assistant and got her maximum dues in time but when to see incomplete service record DEAL administration stopped sum of Rs Four Lakhs (Group Insurance etc.) and start verification.

Resulted the service book of Late Rishi Raj misplaced from DEAL’s record section and pages 12 to 16 from Smt Rita’s service book were also removed.

Present Director DEAL Sh R C Agarwal trying to bury the matter and not interested clarifying the questions arise on the act done by the bunch of corrupt officials of DRDO.

Remarkable and astonishing facts is that Smt Rita worked her entire tenure ( nearly 22 years) in DEAL, Telephone exchange and she knew the total movement of DEAL officials for the top secret project as well as VIP’s movements.

Above informations are clearly shows that the height of boundary wall (almost 3 mtrs with barbed wires) of DEAL, DRDO, Raipur Road, Dehradun has no meaning of security.

Any Tom Dick Harry can be planted without police verification, papers and files can be misplaced or removed or even vanished just under the nose of Sh R C Agarwal, Director, DEAL, DRDO Dehradun.

For the sake of national security this sensitive and critical issue may kindly be look appropriately and needs speedy action.

Regards

Prabhu  Dandriyal,
21-Sunderwala, Raipur,
Phone 0135- 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,
e-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com  website www.corruptionindrdo.com