Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information
requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in respect of Office order no. 12/03/10
dated 5 march 2010 issued by CENTRAL VIGILANCE COMMISSION GOVT OF INDIA , requires
VIGILANCE MANUAL VOL 1 , 6th
Edition wide para 2.16.2 provides
for review of vigilance work in an organization to be taken by chief executive
of the organization. The Commission has advised all organizations to hold
regular meetings for review of vigilance work on monthly /quarterly basis in a
structured manner between the CVO & chief executive in the organization.
Whether structured review meetings were held
between CVO- BEL & CMD -BEL during 01-04-2016 to 31-03-2019 – YES/ NO
If yes, provide the number of such meeting were
held.
Provide
details and minutes of meetings
Whether vigilance work reviewed in such meetings
between CVO-BEL & CMD- BEL during 01-04-2016 to 31-03-2019 – YES/ NO
If yes, provide details and minutes of meetings.
If no , details of other agenda for discussions
Whether actionable points were drawn up during
the meetings during 01-04-2016 to
31-03-2019 – YES/ NO
If yes, provide details and minutes of meetings.
Whether CVO-BEL has reported such
monthly/quarterly review held in monthly report to commission during 01-04-2016 to 31-03-2019 – YES/ NO
Address Room No. 160, Dte of PS, Air HQ (VB), Rafi Marg, New Delhi 110106
Facts leading to appeal:
An application under Section 6(1) of RTI Act 2005 dated 3 May 2019 was submitted to CPIO Air Hq sought information on IACCS project executed by costing approx 7900 Cr as new series posted in various media regarding scam in IACCS project. Being a senior citizen and tax payer I have request for some facts which are not in nature of any strategic information. It is hard to believe that CPIO not denial nor gave requested information judiciously, send reply without application of mind. Copy of RTI application is attached as Enclosure-1.
2. Particulars of Decision/Order of CPIO against which appeal:-
Request information in Para
3 is not provide by CPIO Air Hq and
mentioned – not held with this Public Authority, the IACCS directorate in same
building and as per RTI act CPIO has to transfer under section 6 (3) of the RTI
Act 2005 to concern CPIO of Air Hq who is responsible for IACCS Directorate.
Request information in Para
4 is not provide by CPIO Air Hq quoted
that “not held with this Public Authority”, But CPIO has to transfer
under section 6 (3) of the RTI Act 2005 to concern CPIO of Air Hq who is responsible for IACCS Directorate
Request
information in Para 7 the CPIO, Air Hq not even denied or mention that
information is not available with him, just ignored. Here a big question arise
that the vision of RTI Act 2005 is to restrict the corrupt practices prevailing
in the system should be checked by citizen of India. The CPIO act clearly shows
that he want protect these corrupt practices running in Air force, because in Para
8 also CPIO even not mention any word just ignored the request of
information.
The act of CPIO to ignore the request of Para 7 & 8 shows that CPIO, Air Hq does not believe the constitutional provision of India. The request of information from common citizen is nothing to CPIO, but CPIO want to save culprits..
3. Facts & Grounds leading to appeal:-
the information requested are purely related to corruption and for to take corrective measures to restrict prevailing corruption in defence sector which is very highly dangerous to our national security. Compromising with quality and quantity and encouraging the false documents in procurement and execution in such important project is not anyway appreciable by common country man.
Information not providing
vide Para 7 & 8 itself prove that official sitting on seat are not thinking
of our future Air Force officials who will going to work their duties in IAACS
project centers, basically they are playing with the life of children may be
some present Air Force official’s sons
or daughters who wishes to join Air Force like their father.
The CVO reports shows that Air force deputed in these palaces not allowed the senior vigilance officer to visit site and other way they allowed to any tom dick harry of L&T subletting contractor to roam around. Secondly in IACCS Directorate are co-operting BEL corrupt offices in big way.
4, Prayer /relief sought for:-
Information sought vides RTI Application dated 03.05. 2019 by appellant has been not provided properly it is incomplete information given by CPIO, Air Hq. Therefore, appellant kindly prays to FAA, Air Hq to allow this appeal and issue instructions/orders to CPIO, Air HQ to provide the information sought as seek by appellant vide his RTI Application dated 03 05 2019. Hope FAA will prove that FAA with “Nabha Sprsham Deeptam” not with corrupt officials who are busy with minting money and compromising with national security and also playing with life of our future Air Force aspirants.
5. Declaration:-
I
hereby state that the information and particulars given above are true to the
best of my knowledge and belief.
Sir, every citizen in India very well know that DRDO is under second schedule of RTI Act 2005 and exempted but in corruption and human right DRDO is not exempted in any case. See the enclose RTI Reply from our prestigious organisation, they totally denied to furnish the information and ignored the enclosed evidences the real time photographs and details. The vehicle vanished after RTI, the all records are with Central Command but it feels that our jawans are made for exploitation. We can not close our eyes when these great jawans are exploited by these DRDO corrupt scientists. This means they are above the constitutional provision of India or they are patronized by super corrupt officials. Now as a ministry of defence head you will give direction to DRDO to furnished the information and stop using ARMY jawans as Bonded Labours by these so called scientists who are not even doing any science.
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 in respect of Dr D. P Singh, Estate Manager, DRDO, Dehradun. RTI Act 2005 first amended DRDO was included for exemption list of Section 24. It was clear that information related to corruption and human right violation is not included in above exemption. But unfortunately the DRDO made mockery of RTI Act 2005 and declared himself dictatorially that they are fully exempted as they keep their eyes closed on corruption or human rights angles requested by RTI applicant.
Now here is challenge to CPIO, DRDO that ignore the proofs enclosed with this RTI application and give your standard reply that DRDO exempted in RTI Act.
Enclosed photograph no 1 of Scorpio Vehicle (UK 07 AR 0900) painted with EMU, DRDO, Ministry of Deference, Dehradun, using by Dr D. P Singh, Estate Manager, DRDO, Dehradun. The Vehicle registered in the name of KHUSHAL SINGH, UK07AR0900 RISHIKESH ARTO, UK. KHUSHAL SINGH is contractor who is looking all guest houses under EMU, DRDO, Dehradun
Enclosed photograph no 2 of Scorpio Vehicle (UK 07 AR 0900) dated 26th August working day Hav Rakesh Sharma, posted in EMU, DRDO Dehradun picked Mr Uniyal a private person at 07:46 and moved out to Dehradun. Vehicle crossed Uttarakhand border 08:17.
Enclosed photograph no 3 Tata Maza driving by CHM Tajindra Singh posted in EMU, DRDO Dehradun joined and moved 08:30.
All above photographs were posted in real time on what’s up account of SSP, Dehradun, Major Manish Thapa, Military Intelligence.
Provide the contract details of EMU, DRDO, Dehradun for Scorpio Vehicle (UK 07 AR 0900) for last three years.
Provide the contract details of EMU, DRDO, Dehradun for Scorpio Vehicle (UK 07 AR 0900 current financial year.
Provide the authority given DRDO competent official to Dr D. P Singh, Estate Manager, DRDO, Dehradun for using such name logos like Bharat Sarkar, Raksha Mantralay, EMU, DRDO.
The duties details of Hav Rakesh Sharma, CHM Tajindra Singh and Dr D. P Singh, Estate Manager, DRDO, Dehradun on 26th August 2016, since with private party it was not official or secret mission.
List of contract employees provided by contractor Khushal Singh, as per contract roaster Mr Nandu, Mr Heera, Mr. Govind and Mr Tara are regularly permanent basis working in Dr D. P Singh, Estate Manager Residence since long. Mr Nandu and Mr Tara are staying 24 hrs in Dr D. P Singh residence.
To 15 June 2015
Sh. Sekhar Ranjan Amin,
U/Secretary & CPIO,
Room No 340, Office of Director of Vigilance,
B- Wing Sena Bhawan,
Rajaji Marg, New Delhi -110105
Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in respect of corruption complaints against Dr A K Saxena, Director, DMSRDE, DRDO, Kanpur & other officials with reference to your RTI reply No5/ DO (Vig) /RTI/2015 dated 13 May 2015 stated that complaints are under ministry and DRDO may approached for their reply on the subject.
Provide the current status of complaints against Dr Saxena and other DMSRDE officials.
Provide the copy of letters of CVO, MOD to DRDO with reference to above subject matter till date.
Provide copies of replies received by CVO, MoD against above subject matter till date
To 23 April 2015 Hon’ble Shri Narendra Modi, Prime Minister, PMO, Room No 152 South Block , New Delhi-110011
SUBJECT:- Misuse of Public Money by making Temporary Duty for personal work or visit native place to meet family member by Dr. Vijay Veer, Director, DRL, DRDO, Tezpur.
Sir,
The office of PCDA (R&D) is public authority under purview of RTI Act 2005 and this office is having own independent CPIO and First Appellate Authority. PCDA (R&D) is not an exempted organisation under section 24 of RTI Act 2005, despite the CPIO, PCDA (R&D) deliberately denying the information related to Establishment Matters of DRDO officials like tour details, LTC details, procurement related information etc just to cover up the corrupt practices of DRDO officials. The main objective of PCDA (R&D) should be to minimise the corruption and save the public money.
In my several RTI’s , CPIO, PCDA(R&D) either denied the information under section 24 of the RTI Act 2005 or transferred the RTI’s to DRDO under section 6(3) of RTI Act 2005, which is unethical practice to promote corruption and non-transparency in the Government System.
Therefore, RTI for CPIO, PCDA (R&D) through PMO with kind request to give order to PCDA (R&D) to follow RTI Act 2005 with true & proper sprit and provide information by strictly following the provisions of RTI Act 2005.
PMO may explore tour details of Dr. Vijay Veer from 01 March 2012 to 31 March 2015 to verify Director misusing official powers for personal gain.
Regards
Prabhu Dandriyal,
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun
To 23 April 2015 Smt. Kavita Garg, IDAS, CPIO, PCDA (R&D), West Block-V, R K PURAM,NEW DELHI- 110066
Madam, Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in respect of tour details of Dr. Vijay Veer, Director,DRL, Tezpur from 01 March 2012 to 31 March 2015. .
Copies of all official tour programs from 01 March 2012 to 31 March 2015.
Copies of all the movement orders for his all tour from 01 March 2012 to 31 March 2015.
The details of flying points in specified performa prescribed by LAO, New Delhi.
The information sought is pertaining to allegations of corruption as such not exempted under section 24 of RTI Act 2005.
Dr. Vijay Veer assumed the charge of Director of DRL, Tezpur on 01 March 2012. His wife Dr. Neena Chauhan is serving as Scientist E at Forest Research Institute, Dehradun since beginning of her carrier.
Dr. Vijay Veer is having three immovable properties at Dehradun and his native place is Dehradun.
In Tezpur it was observed that Dr. Vijay Veer is signing his tour program himself while in any other Establishment/Lab of DRDO, Director’s tour programs are signed by CAO/SAO-I/AO/Account Officer.
He is not submitting joining report after tour along with confirmation on Movement Order that he visited to the place for which he made Temporary Duty. Frequent TD resulted, R&D activities of the DRL has been badly suffered. The administration is in bad shape, various CAT cases is the proof DRL scenario.
Surprisingly, Dr. Vijay Veer was on TD even during the marriage & reception of his son at Dehradun in May 2013.
To Date 2nd April 2015 Shri Sanjeev Gautam, Central Public Information Officer, CBI, Plot No. 5-B, Ist FloorA&B Wing, CGO Complex,New Delhi-110003
Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in respect of recommendation of CVO, MOD with Diary No. 14320 dated 24.10.2013 forwarded to CBI, New Delhi for probe in recruitment scam of DRDO under Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 with due approval of then Defence Minister Shri A.K. Antony against top ten retired senior Scientists of DRDO.
Regarding the said recommendation of former Defence Minister the News were covered by print media which are also available on website of CBI.
With reference to facts stated above, kindly provide following information under RTI Act 2005.
The status of said recommendation for probe by CBI.
File noting on the recommendation of MOD in recruitment scam case of DRDO.
Whether any FIR has been lodged in the said case by CBI. (Yes/No)
To Date 22nd March 2015
Shri Syed Ekram Rizwi,
Director & Central Public Information Officer,
Prime Minister’s Office,
South Block,
New Delhi 110011
Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in respect of corrupt practices following by DRDO.
The applicants already filed hundreds of RTI s to DRDO with the aim of expose their corrupt practices earlier up to end of 2011 I have received 50% informations in the basis of those inputs, I have submitted some corruption complaints to CVC and other agencies partly the action were taken but from mid of 2013 I have only received 10% informations but no action taken on corruption exposures. Interestingly since end 2013 DRDO stopped giving any informations against RTI applications, whether it is related to corruption or human right. I tried to my best requested RTI with enclosed corruption evidences but to DRDO refuses to all RTI requests under section 24 (1). DRDO have no respect for constitutional provision of GOI.
The following information is requested with evidences which prima facie supported that Dr Tamilmani and other involved in corrupt practices. This information is requesting through PMO because we have faith on Sh Narendra Modi ji government and if, we will not get any response of this RTI than it is a confirmation that PMO is also in the grip of corrupt officers and Modi ji government has no meaning of RTI Act 2005.
Provide the information that Toyota Innova using by Dr K Tamilmani, DG AERO, Director, ADE and others are procured under Project Rustom II as Remote Video Terminal Vehicle as stated in Dr.Hina Gokhle, DHRD
Provide total Toyota Innova/Scorpios/Safaris in the financial 2012/13, 2013/14 & 2014/15 with nomenclature used, project names by DRDO.
Provide the numbers of Directors/establishment Heads/in-charges of various siblings of DRDO using red beacon on their vehicles.
Provide the total amount dispersed as transport allowance in financial year 2014/15 to Directors/establishment Heads/Program Directors/project Directors /in-charges of various siblings of DRDO
Note – The matter is directly related to corruption and not exempted under section 24 1 of RTI Act 2005
Enclosed : 1. Paper cutting of Sunday Ttandard 22nd March 22015
Photographs of Toyota Innova using by Dr K Tamilmani, Director ADE, Director, HEMRL, Director, DMSRDE,
Dr Hina Gokhle, DHRD letter in respect of vehicle sanction for project Rustom II
Dr Tamilmani January 2015 salary slip
Registration Number PMOIN/R/2015/60727
Sh Vikas Bhattacharya, Director, Using this
The vehicle was procured for Project Rustom in the name of Remote Video Terminal Vehicle. Vide letter No DRDO/02/333/P/2/Vol-II-394/D/R&D date 23/02/2011.
Dr.K Tamilmani, DG (Aero), DRDO, Bangalore availing the transport allowance Rs 14490. Please see his January pay slip
To 13th February 2015
Shri Sekhar Ranjan Amin,
Under Secretary & CPIO,
Room No – 340, Office of Director of Vigilance,
B- Wing, Sena Bhawan, Rajaji Marg,
New Delhi -110105
Reference:
Your letter No. 11/DO (Vig.)/RTI/2014 dated 05 August 2014.
My application under RTI Act 2005 submitted online with Registration Number MODEF/R/2014/61766 dated 24 September 2014.
Hello,
With above referenced letters kindly provide me the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information, RTI Act, 2005 in respect of respect of complaints against Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director, DMSRDE, Kanpur that was forwarded from CVC to Director (Vig.) & CVO (MOD) for necessary action. A complete list of complaints is enclosed as Enclosure-1 for your ready reference
Status report of the complaints.
Whether consolidated report on the complaints against Dr. AK Saxena & others of DMSRDE, DRDO, Kanpur has been received by Director (Vig.) and CVO (MOD) from DRDO as sought by your MOD ID no. 63/DO(Vig.)/CVC/2014 dated 04.08.2014 to Director (Vigilance & Security), DRDO. (Yes/No)
If answer to point (1) is yes then provide the copy of the consolidated report received from Director (Vigilance & Security), DRDO.
The action taken by Director (Vigilance) and CVO (MOD) on the report received from Director (Vigilance & Security), DRDO.
Copy of Action Taken Report (ATR).
The inquiry on complaints is completed or still cases are under inquiry
