To 25th July 2013The CPIORecruitment & Assessment CentreLucknow Road, TimarpurDelhi- 110054
Subject: Transfer of Application AR No 0178 dated 10 July 2013
Sir,
My RTI application to CPIO, DoPT dated 27th May 2013 was transferred to Shri Rajiv Singh, CPIO, & Under Secretary, MoD, South Block vide letter no AB14017/4/2013-Estt (RR)(03074/RTIC/13) dated 28/6/2013. The CPIO, MoD transferred my RTI request to CPIO, DRDO vide letter no Mof D ID No 21(3)2013(1083)/D(RTI) dated 5/7/2013.
Subsequently I have received information of my RTI request point 2 from DoPT vide their letter no F.No.29/38/2013-EO(SM-II) dated 15th July 2013.
The CPIO, DRDO Hq transferred my RTI request vide letter No. RTI/01/2091/P/2013/0178 dated 18th July 2013 to your office for information of point 1 of my RTI request.
As per my previous experiences regarding RTI requests all DRDO establishments 99% replied with their fix quote –
“DRDO is an organisation which is placed in Second Schedule of RTI Act 2005 and is therefore, exempted from disclosures of information under Section 24(1) except information pertaining to the allegations of corruption and human rights violations.”
Therefore, it is requested that the information is pertaining to the allegations of corruption. Sh R K Agarwal’s promotion case is totally based on corruption & nepotism.
I would like to submit some evidences of nepotism of Sh. R. C. Aggarwal, Director, DEAL, DRDO.
Sh. R. C. Aggarwal after taking charge as Director, DEAL put all scientists/staff of his community in important positions. You can verify with Departmental Part orders.
He supported Sh. R K Agarwal for his false claim of work in “Project NARAD”, which was the only real-time successful project and was appreciated by user (IPKF).
Sh. R K Agarwal claimed the aforementioned for his promotion to outstanding scientist and it was published in DRDO’s News Letter September 2012 page No -14
Departmental Part Order for manpower for Project NARAD reference are DO Part-I No.232/AD dated 18/11/1988 and DO Part-I No.238/AD, No.239/AD dated 24/11/1988. There was clear cut mention in the order that Sh. R K Agarwal was not part and parcel of Project NARAD.
The appreciation letter No 35795/Aks/per date 20th April 1990 by Major A K Singh, 57 Mtn Div. Signal Regiment to Sh Surendra Pal, Dy. Director, Project NARAD clearly reveals the names of DEAL’s scientists who participated and contributed their best in the real operation scenario. There is no name of Sh. R.K Agarwal in the appreciation letter.
The DRDO in their RTI reply No.DEAL/RTI/0003/2013 dated 08/04/2013 clearly mentioned that No such document/information is available, means there is nothing available which proves that Sh R K Agarwal was part and parcel of Project ‘NARAD’. It is clear evidence that Sh RC Aggarwal supported Sh R K Agarwal’s false claim for promotion to outstanding scientist because of the only reason of nepotism.
Note: above required information is directly related to corruption and not come under schedule -II
“Whoever does anything with the intention of causing wrongful gain to one person or wrongful loss to another is said to do that thing dishonesty”
To 2nd May 2013 The Defence Minister Room No -104, South Block New Delhi – 110011
Subject: One of the Strong Reasons of the Exodus in DRDO
Honorable Sir,
As you already very well aware that DRDO is in neck deep nepotism and corruption and we all welcome your latest decisions like suspension of Dr. Arun Kumar, not giving nod for further extension to Dr. V. K. Sarswat, order for special audit to CGDA, etc.
Sir, your commitment for honesty and stride for eradication of corruption and nepotism specially in defence sector, we salute your honest efforts and we are trying to contribute some authentic information related to nepotism and corruptions prevailing in DRDO from time to time to strengthen your mission.
In this series I would like to submit some documentary evidences of nepotism of Sh. R. C. Aggarwal, Director, DEAL, DRDO.
Sh. R. C. Aggarwal after taking charge as Director, DEAL put all scientists/staff of his community in important positions. You can verify with Departmental Part orders.
He supported Sh. R K Agarwal for his false claim of work in “Project NARAD”, which was the only real-time successful project and was appreciated by user (IPKF).
Sh. R K Agarwal claimed the aforementioned for his promotion to outstanding scientist and it was published in DRDO’s News Letter September 2012 page No -14 (Copy enclosed)
Departmental Part Order for manpower for Project NARAD reference are DO Part-I No.232/AD dated 18/11/1988 and DO Part-I No.238/AD, No.239/AD dated 24/11/1988. There was clear cut mention in the order that Sh. R K Agarwal was not part and parcel of Project NARAD.
The appreciation letter No 35795/Aks/per date 20th April 1990 by Major A K Singh, 57 Mtn Div. Signal Regiment to Sh Surendra Pal, Dy. Director, Project NARAD clearly reveals the names of DEAL’s scientists who participated and contributed their best in the real operation scenario. There is no name of Sh. R.K Agarwal in the appreciation letter.
The DRDO in their RTI reply No.DEAL/RTI/0003/2013 dated 08/04/2013 clearly mentioned that No such document/information is available, means there is nothing available which proves that Sh R K Agarwal was part and parcel of Project ‘NARAD’. It is clear evidence that Sh RC Aggarwal supported Sh R K Agarwal’s false claim for promotion to outstanding scientist because of the only reason of nepotism. (Copy enclosed)
Sh R.K.Agarwal already created an embarrassing situation for you due to his personal bias towards Schedule Cast when he deliberately cut the APAR numbers of a Technical Officer ‘C’. The victim has already represented this to Director, DEAL on 11th April 2013. But the best part is that DEAL management threatened and focused all their lethal weapons to fix him. And soon you will get this matter from SC/ST committee.
Sir, this nepotism and corruption is in the peak and this is also a right time for you to select a dynamic personality who can first tackle this neck deep nepotism and corruption of DRDO.
Sir, you are giving answering regarding exodus of DRDO scientists to our honorable parliamentarian since last 7-8 years and quoting that the senior scientists E, F, G are not quitting. But you are not aware that by seeing this honoring of incompetent scientists due to nepotism the junior scientists imagine their future and quit for better future.
Second major point is the senior scientists who were/are super seeded by these incompetent scientists are suffering from, blood pressure, heart problems and depressions. Ask health report of senior scientists.
Sir, can we expect any miracle research from these bunch of halfhearted and blood pressure, heart problems and depressions patients? Not at all.
Sir, you can find some scientist ‘G’ age of 38/40/42 etc. but they achieved this due nepotism if it is not true than how many get international recognition of their research work.
Once again it is requested to see this personally in the interest of DRDO as well as in the interest of nation.
Always strongly standing to fight against corruption, nepotism, castism and favoritism prevailing in DRDO
DRDO News Letter September 2012
To 25th February 2013The CPIO RTI/DESIDOC/RKA/25/2/2013Defence Scientific Information & Documentation Centre (DESIDOC) Metcalfe House New Delhi – 110054
Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in respect of DRDO Newsletter September 2012 page No -14. In which the details of Outstanding Scientists of the DRDO. Sh, R K Agarwal, Outstanding Scientist, DEAL “ his main contribution has been the development of NARAD, the first semi-static and transportable terminals developed in the country. These terminals were immediately deployed in SRI LANKA during operation PAWAN where they have played a vital Role.”
The certified copy of his claim for working or association with Project NARAD.
Number of temporary duty if done by Sh R K. Agarwal in connection with Project Narad including deputation to SRI LANKA or any place in India during operation PAWAN.
Provide the copy of DO Part –I published reflecting that Sh R K Agarwal was deputed or associated with Project NARAD, in DEAL, Dehradun
Copy of appreciation letter regarding providing communication during Operation Pawan to IPKF by GOC, IPKF and then S O –in- C.
Number of technical papers published as first author on design aspects of SATCOM systems by Sh R K Agarwal in various publications? Provide the name of Journals /year/page no of publications and issues/ volume numbers.
On “Throughput Acceleration Satellite Adaptation Unit (SAU)” and the role and contribution of Sh R K Agarwal in its patent filing. –
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 not come under schedule -II
“Whoever does anything with the intention of causing wrongful gain to one person or wrongful loss to another is said to do that thing dishonesty”
All of us pained by various letters and RTI proofs appearing on Internet about Corruption & Nepotism about DRDO. We are more pained that you both are keeping silent and no visible actions are being taken. The Villain (Selwamurthy) of DRDO is enjoying and he pushing his people on all fronts to destabilize and embarrass you. One fine example is Varshney who is controlling your office and passing minutely details to his Real BOSS-Selwamurthy.
The material appearing on Internet, may be some of them incorrect and exaggerated, but has created unrest in DRDO- Some are enjoying, some are pained and some, particularly younger lot, confused and feeling betrayed.
A special appeal to both, spare your 48 hours on some of the critical and burning issues and decide and give positive signal to all of us that you are impartial and truly committed towards growth of DRDO in a healthy manner. Don’t involve The Villain for this, he will only misguide you, we recognize both of you as our true guide and have confidence that you will take corrective actions which are visible across all section of DRDO. We all are waiting for ACTIONS and send us POSITIVE energy by your Impartial actions.. YOU ARE DUTY BOUND TO TAKE ACTIONS IMPARTIALLY.
Some of burning issues and suggestions are
NO MORE EXTENSIONS, except very deserving cases, not more than 2 to 3 per 6 month cycle. Extension is equal to death sentence, which is given on rarest of rare cases by our courts. Extension should be also based on principle of rarest of rare cases. If extension given to CV&E, LS, CEPTAM, it will be major joke on DRDO.
Review all extension cases already given, Act as Supreme court and commute certain cases of death sentence. Retire some of tainted and wrongly extension cases like of Selwamurthy, Mohan Rao, Arun Kumar, Jain, Agarwal RC, Narendra Kumar, and similar cases.
You have given charge of HR to very competent Chief Controller. But his Directors are still aligned to Pseudo-HR controller. Do complete overhauling of HR & DOP, it will correct many wrongs of Selwamurthy and his Chamchas who have destroyed basic fiber of DRDO. Let them keep making Mosquito repellent and Chapattis. Implement policy of change of DOP, RAC,DHRD, CEPTAM every 2 year and don’t just rotate them.
International Cooperation Controller should be person who had collaborated with different countries in his younger and middle carrier. A yoga teacher is just unfit for this job and using this as platform for self image enhancement.
Dr PS Goel should not be given Extension; the HARD fact is that he is only responsible for bringing moral of all scientists to deep sea low level.
Grass root level interaction of SA with middle and younger lot in different zones, on at least quarterly based. It will bring a Sea change if all are given free environment to discuss with their family head.
Accountability of Directors and Chief Controllers should be more aggressive and transparent. They should be answerable to all wrong done in their areas, including poor result in respect of deserving scientists in assessment due to non projection of their achievement in right manner.
To 22th August 2011The Honorable Prime MinisterPMO, South BlockNew Delhi -110011
Subject: Grant of Extension of service of Scientists beyond the age of superannuation
Honorable Sir, Department of Personnel and Training O M No.26012/8/2011-Estt. (A) Dated the 16th May, 2011 stats that the laid down criteria for extension of service to the scientist should be in term of proviso to
i) FR 56 (d)
ii) Departmental Peer Review Committee (DPRCs) headed by the Secretary of the Scientific Departments are constituted by the DOP&T with the approval of Prime Minister for a term of 2 years to consider the cases of extension of service of scientists beyond 60 years and up to 62 years.
iii) Extension of service of eminent scientists of international stature
iv) Indicate whether this will block promotion opportunities of others in the Department
v) Will be processed further for approval of ACC through the office of the Establishment Officer
Sir, the above guidelines thoroughly overruled by DRDO establishment. When Dr APJ Kalam was granted extension of service he had the expertise and international recognition in his field (Missile Technology). Dr M Natrajan was granted extension on the basis of his work in MBT (Arjun Tank). Dr U R Rao, ISRO got extension because of his contribution in space technology.
DRDO, once Dr V K Atre became, SA to RM overruled the guidelines of DoPT provisions for extension. A new culture was established that is those scientists who were close to Dr Atre they were recommended for extension without justifying their contributions to science & technology. Afterwards the secretary of DRDO used this tool for those who are expert in misappropriation and manipulation of Government funds and misinterpretation of Government rules to their personal benefits.
These scientists nowhere stand as per guidelines of FR 56 (d) and you will find most of cases the scientists are involved totally in administrative job for years. Interestingly Secretary DRDO removed the required paras of Annexure FR 56 (d) where it states the justification why his service is needed and the details of contributions are thoroughly overruled.
Surprisingly, no one pointed these corrupt practices in the process of granting extension. Some applications which I have received by RTI from DoPT are enclosed for your ready reference. Which are the self explanatory, under the name of Defence research and under the shadow of official Secret Act 1923 and the bonafide possession of CCS Rules 1965 they have be-fooled the DoPT,PMO,ACC etc.
DRDO at an interval of every three months gives extension to at least 10-12 scientists, out of which not a single scientist deserve the recommendation as per guide lines of DoPT O M No.26012/8/2011-Estt. (A) Dated the 16th May, 2011 Normally DRDO Hqrs recommend extension to the (Service Provider) like Sh T Mohan Rao, Ex Director, GTRE (Massage Parlour Fame), DRDO recommend Dr S K Vasudeva of SPIC even beyond 64 years of age as he arranged the all cocktails parties + in 5* with help of CS Constructions etc and provide Mrs Kanimozhi‘s methods routing money through her daughter’s firm M/S M V- Grfix as IB already reported to PMO.
DRDO recommends the name of scientists/Directors who manage the misappropriation of funds of projects/ programs. As an example the case of Sh R C Aggarwal, Director, DEAL, Dehradun and Sh Iqbal Singh of IRDE, Dehradun Sh R C Aggarwal joined as Charge-man and become Director, DEAL as Scientist ‘G’ in 2007.
He has no international publications,No patents,No significant contribution in any projects at LRDE, NPOL, DLRL and DEAL where he was posted earlier
As a director he wrote an essay (cut paste copy technology) on Software Defined Radio and prepared a proposal for sanction having 60 sub contracts paras. This proposal opened up an avenue to distribute poor tax payer’s money. Rs 100 Crores sanctioned for SDR project and with few months he was promoted as Scientist ‘H’ and also got extension for two years and waiting Scientist for Director’s post Sh K N Rao of DEAL died with shock (Heart Attack).
Sh R C Aggarwal’s extension was recommended by Dr Arun Kumar, DOP, DRDO who was Scientist ‘E’ in 2001 when Sh R C Aggarwal was Scientist ‘F’. The DPRC which recommended Sh R C Aggarwal had a external member Dr P S Goel, Charman, RAC, whose contribution in ISRO as scientist is big zero, No international publications, No patents, only cut copy paste technology expertise.
Sh R C Aggarwal spent Rs 10 Lakh on TA/DA per year so he is able to contribute Rs 1.25 Lakhs per month in GPF account. As he is using Red beacon on his vehicle drawing Transport allowance using official driver in private car for fooling department.
Sh R C Aggarwal very bluntly says “the development of SDR will take 20 years time” and the PDC of SDR is 36 months.
Dr S C Jain who is enjoying extension but in the same time did not get the promotion to Scientist ‘H’, when he was not fit for promotion then how come he was recommended for extension in service, it can only happened in DRDO.
He has no international publications,No patents,No significant contribution in any projects at DEAL
But he is master in manipulation of government funds and misinterpretation of government rules in the interest of his boss. The reason he was benefited, was to get extension and job for his son who has fake qualification.
Sh Iqbal Singh Scientist ‘H’, IRDE, Dehradun got extension without justification of his scientific contribution.
He has no international publications,No patents,No significant contribution in any projects at IRDE
Only significant contribution is misappropriation of government funds, he gave orders to a firm where his son works
Dr S S Sundaram, Director, IRDE, Distinguished Scientist got extension for his golden achievement in project SAMYUKTA (Electronic Warfare), it is well known that Project SAMYUKTA started with Rs 250 Crores initial cost in May 1994 and when buried unceremoniously in 2006 it consumed Rs 6000 Crores of poor tax payer’s money.
Dr Arun Kumar, DOP, DRDO never did science and there is no question of scientific contribution. He is master in manipulation the governments rules and extend the path of favoritism to benefit DRDO’s top brasses wards. Appointment of his own daughter as scientist ‘B’ by violating all recruitment rules of DRDO. The enquiry is going on without any result like DRDO projects because the chairman of enquiry Dr Salwan, Ex DRDO scientist got Rs 80 Lakhs project with Rs 1 Lakh/month salary from Dr Arun Kumar itself.
The Honorable Prime Minister is requested to stop this criminal act of DRDO’s extension business, which they are recommending without justification. Please go through the recommended applications of DRDO scientists which I have received from DoPT through RTI.
Sir, this is the major reason of brain drain in DRDO because I am receiving lot of mails of ex DRDO young scientists from all over the world in my website www.corruptionindrdo.com, they share their experiences in this pathetic condition of DRDO.
Defence Minister, Room No 104- South Block, New Delhi- 110011
Shri Shashi Kant Sharma, Defence Secretary, Room !01- South Block, New Delhi – 110011
Ms. Alka Sirohi, Secretary (Personnel), Room No 112, North Block-110011
Dr V K Saraswat, D G (R&D), DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg, New Delhi=110105FR 56 (d) comparisonNo.26012/8/2011-Estt. (A)Government of IndiaMinistry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions(Department of Personnel and Training)North Block, New Delhi,Dated the 16th May, 2011
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Subject: Grant of Extension of service of Scientists beyond the age of superannuation – Issue of instructions regarding.
The undersigned is directed to refer to Department of Personnel & Taining O.M. No.26012/6/2002-Estt.(A) dated 9.12.2002 (copy enclosed) on the subject mentioned above laying down the criteria for considering cases of extension of service of Scientists in terms of proviso to FR 56(d) and to state that the guidelines for extension of service of eminent scientists of international stature beyond 62 years have been further reviewed as a need has been felt for a rigorous Peer group screening by an inter disciplinary Committee of experts.
2. Departmental Peer Review Committee (DPRCs) headed by the Secretary of the Scientific Departments are constituted by the DOP&T with the approval of Prime Minister for a term of 2 years to consider the cases of extension of service of scientists beyond 60 years and up to 62 years.
3. It has now been decided with the approval of Prime Minister that the existing/reconstituted Departmental Peer Review Committee shall also do the first stage screening of Scientists for their extension beyond 62 years of age and thereafter the DPRCs’ recommendations will be placed before the Committee under the Cabinet Secretary provided that the DPRCs’ have at least two outside experts apart from Secretary (Personnel & Training). The DPRCs must give detailed justification for such extension based on merits of the case; the international stature of the person recommended and also indicates whether this will block promotion opportunities of others in the Department. Such recommendations of the DPRCs for extension of service of Scientists beyond 62 years will be sent of the Establishment Division of the Department of Personnel & Training for placing the cases before the Committee under Cabinet Secretary. Only such cases recommended by the Committee under Cabinet Secretary will be processed further for approval of ACC through the office of the Establishment Officer. Cases of extension of service of Scientists beyond 60 years and up to 62 years recommended by DPRC will continue to be sent directly to the office of Establishment Officer in DOP&T as at present.
4. All proposals for extension of service of Scientists beyond 62 years in terms of the 3rd proviso to FR 56(d) may, therefore, be processed keeping in view the above guidelines in addition to the criteria stipulated in the OM dated 9.12.2010.
(P.Prabhakaran)Director (E)
DoPT RTI replyDoPT Reply for Sh R C Aggarwal Page 1DoPT Reply for Sh R C Aggarwal page 2DoPT Reply For Sh R C Aggarwal page 3DoPT Reply for Sh Iqbal Singh page 1DoPT Reply for Sh Iqbal Singh Page 2
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION Room No. 308, B-Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066
Information Asked Regarding – The information sought for is not related to end senior officer in his individual/personal capacity but in his capacity being a public authority.
Too frequent visit to a particular destination on Government expenses require to justify and as to how much it was beneficial to the organization and how much to the officer especially when he belongs to that particular destination. It appears that the permanent residence is his Hqrs and place of posting is a temporary duty station. The frequent move availability of the officer in the Hqrs. station may lead to problem of command and control and discipline, which may hamper the progress and led to undue delay and time and cost overrun to ongoing projects of DRDO.
In this particular case I requested the TD details of Dr. Prahlada, Appellate Authority, CC R&D (Ae & SI) & DS, who is staying C-7 Qutab Enclav, DRDO guest house since his posting to DRDO Hqrs, for him most of time he took his breakfast in his Hyderabad residence and lunch in DRDO Hqrs and evening for dinner he was again back to his Hyderabad residence. Please see his TD detail and then decide.
Second one is Shri RC Aggarwal, Director DEAL, Dehradun, since his posting he use to out from DEAL, Dehradun almost more than 250 days out of 365 days. How can the armed forces expect trustworthy products from these so called senior scientists?
There more 9-10 CC R&D and Directors who are belongs to Hyderabad and Bangalore and their families are staying Hyderabad and Bangalore respectively and they all are staying in DRDO guest houses they are giving their residence address in telephone directory at DRDO guest houses and enjoying HRA also. They are frequent fliers, they all are already break the Milkha Singh ‘s (Flying Sikh of India) records and relishing without fear with TD with poor tax payers money.
APPELLANT – Shri Prabhu Dayal DandriyalPUBLIC AUTHORITY – DRDO.
DATE OF HEARING – 29.06.2011
DATE OF DECISION – 29.06.2011
Facts:-
Heard today dated 29.06.2011. The appellant is present. DRDO is represented by Dr. A.K. Tyagi, Scientist ‘F’ and Dr. Deepak Mishra, Scientist ‘E’. These appeals are being disposed of through a common order. The parties are heard. The order passed in each case is as follows:
The RTI Request –
To Date 7th June 2010The CPIO & Addl Director, DRDO HQ No RTI/DRDO/PTD/7/6/2010 Room No. 314A DRDO Bhawan , Rajaji Marg New Delhi – 110 105
Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005.
After taking his charge as CC R&D at DRDO Hqrs, how many days he stayed in DRDO Hqrs up to 31st March 2010
How many temporary duties to Hyderabad he had been with total stay at Hyderabad.
How much in total TA/DA he has drawn year wise from his joining as CC R&D at DRDO up to 31st March 2010.
With Reference to Shri RC Agarwal, Director DEAL, Dehradun
After taking his charge as Director DEAL, Dehradun , how many days he stayed in Dehradun up to 31st March 2010
How many temporary duties to Bangalore he had been with total stay at Bangalore
How much in total TA/DA he has drawn year wise from his joining as Director, DEAL up to 31st March 2010.
Note: – above required information is directly related to corruption and not come under schedule – II
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 provision 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 above request, where I may require file first appeal.
I do hereby declare that I am the 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 expiry of 30 day period after you have received the application.
Enclosed – Rs 10 Postal Order No 60E 034935
RegardsPrabhu Dayal Dandriyal21-Sunderwala, RaipurDehradun-248008Phone – 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,e-mail id prabhu@dandriyal.com Blog – http://corruptionindrdo.blogspot.com
The RTI request was denied by CPIO, DRDO Hqrs on 2nd June 2010
The Appellate Authority, DRDO Hqrs was denied on 16th August 2010
File No.CIC/LS/A/2011/000386:-
The CPIO is directed to provide the following information:-
(i) The number of visits made by Dr. Prahlad to Hyderabad on official duty during 2009 & 2010 and the total amount of TA/DA drawn by him.
(ii) Similar information may be provided in respect of Shri R.C. Aggarwal regarding his isits to Bangalore.
Appeal to clean DRDO of corrupt and anti-national officials
