Prateek Goyal – Saturday, May 26, 2018, 8:12 PM Sakal Times
“According to sources in Army, Dubey was shunted for reporting the security breach to Army Headquarters and CBI”
Pune: In a classic case of harassment of a whistleblower, who had exposed a security breach, the office of an Army officer was sealed on the orders of a high ranking Army official.
Earlier, on March 13, 2018 Sakal Times had carried a report that said the CBI was going to probe a Major General’s role in a security breach at VRDE.
As per the latest development, Lt Colonel NK Dubey found his office at the Ahmednagar-based DRDO’s Vehicle Research & Development Establishment (VRDE) sealed at around 5.30 pm on Tuesday evening. A letter was issued to him half an hour later, stating that Major General Ajay Gupta, Director of VRDE, has transferred him to the National Centre for Automotive Testing.
Despite the ongoing CBI inquiry against Gupta in the security breach matter, he was recently given an extension after completing two years at VRDE through an order issued by Secretary DD R&D and Chairman of DRDO Dr S Christopher on May 18, 2018. Surprisingly, within a two working days of this order, Gupta shunted Dubey out of his office.
According to sources in Army, Dubey was shunted for reporting the security breach to Army Headquarters and CBI. Dubey reported about a 30 minute meeting conducted by Gupta on February 15, 2018 with two foreign nationals and a non-resident Indian, along with officials of a private company, without taking clearance from the Directorate of Vigilance and Security, New Delhi, as is mandatory for DRDO officials.
Earlier, Dubey reported the security lapses at VRDE, including inadequate guard posts, unavailability of QRT vehicle, unavailability of routes to do perimeter patrolling, inadequate boundary lights, etc. to DRDO, after which a letter dated May 22, 2017 was written by Gupta to Army HQ to transfer Dubey. The Army headquarters, however, refused to do so. (Army HQ letter available with Sakal Times)
A source said, “Lt Colonel Dubey have been targeted for exposing corruption and corrupt practices. Previously also, in 2017, Major General Gupta kept him out of office for around two months despite Army HQ refraining him from doing so.” Source added that Gupta had received the letter on June 12 from Army HQ, but he sat on it till August as it was demi-official (person to person). Source said that due to this, Dubey could join back only in August after being informed by Army HQ about the letter. Sealing the office of Dubey and posting him out is an act of revenge against him for being a whistleblower in a number of previous cases against Gupta.
It is significant to note that in 2015, dozens of complaints were reported against Gupta for his deliberate acts and omissions of misconducts under CCS (Conduct) Rules 1964 and under the Army Act, criminal misconduct amounting to corruption under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and criminal offences under IPC to then defence minister Manohar Parrikar. Gupta, then the Director of Vigilance and Security, DRDO HQ, New Delhi, was removed from his post and transferred to the office of Director General, Aeronmautical Systems, Bengaluru.
When questioned, Gupta said, “He (Dubey) is being relieved because there is an investigation against him for leakage of information which he was holding and gave to an unauthorised person outside the lab. Somebody has asked us to conduct an inquiry. He may influence the investigation and hence, he is being posted out.”
Responding to questions that Gupta sat on the Army HQ’s order overruling his decision to transfer Dubey, Gupta said, “DRDO is not under Army, DRDO is an independent organisation, which runs on the basis of its own rules and regulations. If the Army has posted him here, then there is a particular procedure which has to be followed as per DRDO rules. Even DRDO has written to the Army to post him back, I don’t know why the Army is not posting him back.”
When questioned about the VRDE security breach and complaint to CBI, Gupta replied, “I don’t know what you are talking about. I don’t want to talk further.”
“Many old TOTs by DRDO given to industries will be under the scanner.”
The inquiry was ordered after a news report about the repetitions of TOT by DRDO at the Defence Expo held at Chennai in April.
Similiarly, in year 2013, one of the TOTs in question of an explosive device kit prepared by High Enegy Material Laboratory (HEMRL) Pune received a lot of media attention after the signing of MoU with a US-based company.
Sakal Times has found out that a propaganda of TOT was promoted in order to boost the image of DRDO after the corruption and nepostism in it was exposed by the audit report of Comptroller General of Defence Accounts (CGDA) in 2012.In order to Boost the image of DRDO Avinash Chander,the then director of DRDO in year 2013 served the old wine in new bottle and created a propoganda for reverse technology transfer to USA by forged TOT of explosive device kit prepared at HEMRL, Pune.
According to documents with Sakal Times, the patent for EDK was falsified and a memorandum of understanding (MOU) was signed with one South Carolina-based company – which was actually a car accessories’ company with only two employees.
Murky background
HEMRL developed the EDK technology and applied to patent it in March 1996. In February 2010, the EDK was patented in the name of its inventors – Rabindra Kumar Sinha, Jaman Singh Gharia, Usha Devi Ramchandran Nair and Hira Lal Yadav.
Despite this, HEMRL falsely credited the innovation on the name of another scientist who was not the inventor – Reny M Roy – and was sent to America. The letter from HEMRL stated that she is the team leader and her presence in USA for the demonstration is necessary.
Roy claims this is wrong information. “The team had not completed their work, it was us who made it operational. Nothing is on anybody’s name, please don’t do such things as DRDO is doing good work,” she said.
Sinha, one of the inventors of EDK, said, “We completed the project and we don’t know why our name has not come and it doesn’t affect us.”
The DRDO director in 2013, when the MOU was signed, Avinash Chander, is currently based in Hyderabad and defended his actions saying, “I am not responsible for this, I was not the head of HEMRL lab. You should ask the concerned director.”
Propaganda and repeated MOU of TOT
2011: HEMRL signed the first MOU with Crowe and Company, a Summerville,South Carolina-based car accessory and consulting services company with annual revenue of USD 1 lakh and has two employees. The MOU was signed between the then HEMRL director Shubhanand Rao and Fay Crow, who was the president of Crowe and company. It is significant to note that before signing the MOU with Crowe and company, DRDO signed a licensing agreement for EDK with a NOIDA based company by the name of Vantage Integrated Security Solutions-which used to deal in the assembling of CCTV Cameras
2012: Controller General of Defence Accounts audit reveals large scale corruption in DRDO projects and VK Saraswat, the then Director General was relieved from his services. The new Director Avinash Chander again signed an MOU with Crowe and Company in Washington DC.
2013:The new Director Avinash Chander again signed an MOU with Crowe and Company in Washington DC. A big function was organized by the DRDO at US Chamber of Commerce building. A dinner party was also hosted by the then Indian Ambassador to Amercia Nirupama Roy for DRDO official and family members of Fay Crowe. A delegation of a dozen scientist including Chander, Roy and Satish Naik, a Technical officer took part in the event.
2015: Chander was sacked by the then Defence Minister, Manohar Parrikar. DRDO team comprised Chander, Reny Roy and Satish Naik, technical officer in addition to nine officials
DRDO’s explanation
Though DRDO claims that no explanation was demanded from them, Directorate of Public Interface (DPI) of DRDO has sent an explanatory letter to Defence Minister dated April 23.
The letter stated that TOT’s were not repeated during the Defence Expo 2018, and that earlier the technology was demonstrated to clients and later a proposal for TOT was sent to them.
DRDO spokesperson Manish Bhardwaj told Sakal Times, “No such inquiry has been ordered by Honourable Raksha Mantri on this matter. The news report refereed by you is factually incorrect. A rebuttal was already sent to the concerned media by the Directorate of Public Relations (DPR), Ministry of Defence.”
Prateek Goyal=Monday, April 2, 2018, Sakal Times
Pune: PK Mehta, Director General of city-based Armament and Combat Engineering Systems (ACE), a Defence Research and Development Organisation establishment, and Major General Ajay Gupta, Director of Ahmednagar-based Vehicle Research and Development Establishment (VRDE) are facing allegations that they have misused their financial powers for sanctioning of fallacious defence projects costing Rs 93 crore.
“Projects worth Rs 93 crore sanctioned allegedly without Army requirement”
A complaint was received by the Prime Minister Office and DRDO HQ, Ministry of Defence, about sanctioning of projects without project requirement from user – the Army in this case. The matter was reported by a serving officer of Indian Army to MOD and PMO.
The complaint letter dated March 11 states that the three defence projects were aggressively pursued by Gupta and sanctioned by Mehta in later half of 2017, without any requirement from the Army.
Corruption in DRDO
A highly placed source in DRDO lab, on condition of anonymity, told Sakal Times that the process of sanctioning of technology demonstration projects in DRDO has become very casual. The projects are being sanctioned without issuance of PSQRs from users’ (Army, Navy, Air Force) participation and requirement. He said, “It’s high time the Ministry conducts an enquiry in sanctioning of projects as there is lot of corruption going on in DRDO.
The sanctioning authority with Mehta is Rs 50 crore per project while Gupta’s power is Rs 5 crore per project. Together they have sanctioned projects worth Rs 93.67 crore.”
Mehta’s defence
When Sakal Times contacted Mehta, he said, “Many a times, users are not aware of the technology so there are projects which are sanctioned without their requirement. It is sanctioned only after being reviewed by various experts. Even after the sanctioning, we have to look for the outcome, because in research and development there are chances that a project can be a failure.”
“Interest of nation is most important and we have to be independent in the manufacturing of defence projects and we are working on it under ‘Make in India’ programme of government,” added Mehta.
Despite repeated attempts to contact Gupta on phone and through texts, he was not available for comment.
Experts fume
KK Mishra, Joint Director (Retd), DRDO, said, “How can they sanction the projects without requirement from users. Defence projects are not some college projects one should remember that huge amount of money is invested in them. Participation of user is required before sanctioning of such projects. Many a times senior authorities sanction such projects for their own benefits. In past also people have sanctioned projects and gained monetary benefits from them.”
Defence expert Lt Gen DB Shekatkar (Retd) said, “It is surprising that a project has been sanctioned without requirement of user. For procurement of any armament or equipment for armed forces, user requirement is necessary. Such matters should be inquired into by Army headquarters.”
Subject: Army Two Star General made mockery of Indian Army’s reputation in DRDO.
Sir,
In the name of Services Interaction, DRDO has service officers from all three wings of the armed forces. The officers are posted on a tenure basis.
It is observed that in DRDO more than 90% services officers are assigned logistic/ administrative jobs like Security Officer, Motor Transport Officer, Estate Manager, Material Management and managing scientists officers mess/canteen requirements, etc.
Some smart services officers who are involved in DRDO’s scientists’ bluff game are able to get permanent absorption in the organization and enjoy services as well as the scientist sticker.
But sincere services officers face a lot of embarrassment from the corrupt scientist herd. They face unprecedented transfers in their short tenure, negative remarks on their service records only because they perform the job assigned honestly. For all these unfair means DRDO takes help of senior services officers who are permanently absorbed and are enjoying all kinds of benefits along with the corrupt scientists.
Since the last 30 years, DRDO has not been able to quote a single services officer who has contributed to any remarkable technical contribution to the nation through DRDO (except the services doctors).
The important part of these absorbed services officers is that they are promoted unduly without contribution to the nation or services. Only thing that they protect are the bluffers.
Only one example to prove the aforementioned is Maj. Gen. Ajay Gupta, present Director, VRDE, DRDO, Ahmednagar. If anyone sees his journey in DRDO, he will know how blessed the Maj. Gen. is because of saving culprit scientist as long as he was serving tenure as Director Vigilance, DRDO, HQ. Of the hundreds of complaints filed, he stopped or delayed multiple cases. This reveals the truth about how corruption flourishes in DRDO with the help of service officers.
Maj. Gen. Ajay Gupta, present Director, VRDE, DRDO, Ahmednagar made mockery of Indian Army reputation on 15th February 2018.
As reported by Sakal Times “CBI to probe Major Gen’s role in security breach at VRDE” March 14, 2018”
It is a very serious matter that active Army Maj. Gen, who was earlier served as Director Vigilance & Security. DRDO HQ for long tenure did this misadventure.
As per Sakal Times “When contacted, Maj Gen Gupta said, “I did not conduct any meeting with those foreign nationals. They came to VRDE without any clearance, which is why I went to the gate to turn them back.”
Above statement of Maj Gen Gupta is totally wrong because as per evidences for telling no for meeting he can pass the massage through Security or if he wants to say no personally, how come conveying the same took 30 minutes.
15th Feb 2018 Dhound Gate, VRDE, DRDO, Ahemadnagar
Foreigners reached at Dhound Gate, VRDE, DRDO, Ahemadnagar- 10:29:56
Director reached in his flag car at Dhound Gate, VRDE. Ahemadnagar- 10:33:12
Something dumped in Foreigner’s vehicle without security – 10:44:44
Director back in his flag car from Dhound Gate, VRDE Ahemadnagar- 11:00:43
Maj. Gen spend time with two foreign nationals almost – 27.31 Minutes
Second one most important evidence not highlight in news clip that is at 10:44:44 hrs, 15th Feb 2018 Cam – 3 of Dhound gate recorded that some stuff was dumped in foreigner’s white car by VRDE personals, Maj Gen Ajay Gupta was present there in meeting with foreign national.(Evidence – 12)
As per CCTV recording one local vehicle dealer was present in above said meeting as per sources he was only organized the meeting which itself explanatory that Maj Gen Ajay Gupta very much involve personally with vendors/dealer etc.
Therefore, for the clean reputation of Indian Army a serious inquiry is needed, CBI, IB, MI are have their own course but Army Headquarter should deal this matter in high level. Because the Maj Gen Ajay Gupta approached DRDO Hqrs to send a denial to media on this issue fortunately it did not work since Maj Gen Ajay Gupta was enjoying the post of Dir. Vig & Security for a long time and have lot of inputs of wrong doings of high level DRDO official so he will try to bury the incident and influence the enquiry.
As a citizen of India and tax payer I request you to take appropriate action on above said incident and set exemplary precedent for service officers who are serving in DRDO and working against national interest. Hope we will soon be able to see our grate army practice to dealt such serious security/corruption matter which can dent our national interest
SHASHWAT GUPTA RAY Monday, December 24, 2012 AT 12:14 PM (IST)
PUNE: The Army’s refusal to accept a modular charge system developed by the city-based DRDO lab High Explosive Materials Research Laboratory (HEMRL) has resulted in wasteful expenditure of Rs 13.48 crore for the DRDO, a recent report by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) has said.
The modular charge system helps to enhance functioning of Artillery guns. The chapter titled ‘Unfruitful expenditure on development of modular charge system for field guns’ said that the DRDO undertook a Technology Development (TD) project for development of the modular charge system for 105 mm and 130 mm guns based on a request by the Director General of Artillery. This project was handed over to Pune-based DRDO lab HEMRL.
In the field of artillery guns, modular charge system was considered desirable over the existing bagged charge system in view various advantages.
“HEMRL developed the systems by spending Rs 13.48 crore and after successful technical trials offered both the systems (105/130 mm) in September 2010 for user trials. However, at that stage DG Artillery showed disinterest in the system since the field guns were nearing the end of their life cycle and were likely to be de-inducted from service over next seven to 10 years. This rendered the entire efforts and expenditure of Rs 13.48 cr unfruitful,” the CAG report said.
In reply to audit observation, the DG Artillery stated (May 2012) that DRDO had been asked to undertake the project at no cost implication to the Army and the systems were not accepted as the DRDO did not adhere to the timeline.
On the contrary, the DRDO Headquarters stated (July 2012) that the Army had been associated at each stage of development and kept informed of progress.
“The finger pointing by two organisations both under the Ministry of Defence, DRDO which is responsible for indigenisation and Army which is expected to put such indigenous weapons system to use, indicates that both the organisations within the same Ministry have been operating in silos,” the report said.
While the Army headquarters did not respond to a Sakal Times query on the matter, Director of Public Interface, DRDO Headquarters Ravi Kumar Gupta said that after the establishment of technology, R&D work was undertaken to apply it to field guns of the other caliber like 105 mm and 130 mm field guns.
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.
