Tag Archives: year

Drdo

COMPLAINT AGAINST CORRUPTION IN PROCUREMENT BY DR. VIJAY VEER, DIRECTOR, DRL, TEZPUR

8 Comments

REMINDER-I

 To                                                                                                        Date – 20th April 2015         Central Vigilance Commissioner,                                                                                                 Central Vigilance Commission,                                                                                                       Satarkta Bhawan, A- Block,GPO Complex, INA                                                                         New Delhi-110023

SUBJECT: COMPLAINT AGAINST CORRUPTION IN PROCUREMENT BY DR. VIJAY VEER, DIRECTOR, DRL, TEZPUR

REFERENCE:  MY COMPLAINT ON THE SUBJECTED CITED ABOVE DATED 30 SEPTEMBER 2014

Sir,                                                                                                                                                               With reference to above cited complaint against Dr. Vijay Veer, Director, Defence Research Laboratory(DRL), Tezpur (Assam) under Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO), Min. of Defence, it is submitted that Dr. Vijay Veer is retiring at the end of this year and till date no action has been taken by CVC in this matter. The corrupt practices at DRL, Tezpur are continued without any fear by Dr. Vijay Veer as he is retiring this year and trying to materialize more & more procurement cases and other irregularities in DRL, Tezpur.

In this connection, one RTI Application submitted  dated 30 March 2015 to get status of the complaint to CPIO, CVC but till date no status of complaint received from CVC  against Dr. Vijay Veer, Director, DRL, Tezpur.

Kindly issue orders for speedy action on the said complaint and an early disposal of complaint prior to retirement of Dr. Vijay Veer, Director, DRL, Tezpur.

Regards

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

Drdo

DRDO Assessment Buisness

21 Comments

To                                                                                                                16th April 2015                 Hon’ble Shri Manohar Parrikar,                                                                                                     Defence Minister,Room No -104,                                                                                                   South Block,New Delhi-110011

 

Subject: Young and honest DRDO Scientists suffering from corruption/ nepotism/ favoritism in promotions.

Sir,

Since last 10 years it is observed that the assessments for promotion is become business for senior top scientists and lab directors. Every year the result of assessment pour frustrations among deserve scientists and only such scientist stays in DRDO who digest the promotions of incompetents and specially outstanding promotions of  those who are engaged for non scientific assignments.

DRDO brain drain is directly connected with DRDO assessment procedure. The RAC Director, Dr R K Jain himself an example of violation of FCS. His long tenure as Director RAC also proves the DRDO top managements are happy with his role.

Every year the entry of scientists especially by lateral entry is one of the main source of induction of their favorite ones by tailor made post advertisement. In this connection the complaints are piling with various GOI agencies.

The experts invitations are also a big game in these assessment, example in case of assessment of Dr A K Singh, most of time of his assessment same expert was called.

RAC, Director facilitate in this respect to lab directors/ cc/ DG’s to promote their beloveds through this mechanism and paint as fair assessments.

Sir, the following letter is received by website regarding assessment business of DRDO, forwarding for your perusal.

Regards

Prabhu Dandriyal,
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun-248008                                                                                 Phone 0135- 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,                                                                                 e-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com  website www.corruptionindrdo.comada letter recvd 13 april 2015

ada letter recvd 13 april1

Drdo

Manohar Parrikar tells DRDO to focues on core areas; says not to take up new projects

9 Comments
manohar-parrikar-tells-drdo-to-focues-on-core-areas-says-not-to-take-up-new-projects
manohar-parrikar-tells-drdo-to-focues-on-core-areas-says-not-to-take-up-new-projects

By Manu Pubby, ET Bureau | 26 Mar, 2015, 04.52AM IST
NEW DELHI: Most of the military systems it develops face time delays and cost escalation but ironically the one thing that the Defence Research and Development Organisation is considered good at by the armed forces – constructing buildings and executing civil works – is now being taken away.

Sending a clear message to India’s premier defence research agency to focus on its core functions, Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar has instructed that the organisation will no longer undertake civil and maintenance works of other departments, including entities like the Brahmos Missile Company and the Strategic Forces Command besides the three armed forces.

In a terse set of instructions to DRDO headquarters, Parrikar has ordered that the organisation shall no longer undertake any new civil or maintenance works projects with effect from March 12, choking a large portion of its independent revenue stream.

drdo detailsIt is a lesser known facet of the organisation but DRDO has a works department that executes construction projects – from office buildings to missile storage units, launching areas and accommodation – worth over Rs 5,000 crore every year.

Beside projects for armed forces, DRDO has recently constructed the new AICTE headquarters in Delhi.

PMO

Senior nuclear scientist faces wrath of offering suggestions to PM Modi

Leave a comment

India TV News Desk [ Updated 13 Mar 2015, 12:22:05
New Delhi: One of India’s senior nuclear scientists, Pashupati Rao, who works at Nuclear Fuel Complex (NFC) run by the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) is now facing wrath for sending suggestions to Prime Minister Narendra Modi on a critical national project.

On 28 September, 2014, Rao had sent his suggestions including sensitive matters on the new nuclear complex to PM’s official portal (pmindia.gov.in), which PMO had further sent to Rao’s employer, DAE, marking them as ‘grievance’ and sent out another mail to Rao on January 21 this year, saying his ‘grievance’ has been disposed.

The PMO, in its communication to DAE, had revealed Rao’s name and designation, thus making his full identity known to his superiors.

Following this, DAE persistently started following up with Rao asking for explanations while the latter desperately continued to explain himself.

As published in Economic Times, some DAE officials on condition of anonymity even said that Rao may face serious consequences.

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

Dandriyal, in his RTI application demanded to know the guidelines followed by PMO while dealing with sensitive matters. He told that the PMO reply that came a month later, on February 27, said the request is being processed, and details are being collected.

In the Rao’s suggestions to the Prime Minister, he had proposed that an independent team be appointed to review the project and he also mentioned technical details on cutting costs in it.

However, the PMO having sent his suggestions as ‘grievance’ to DAE has put the top nuclear scientist in a bureaucratic nightmare.

The communication that happened with PMO was with NFC, Hyderabad, where Rao worked.

His matter was turned into a staff grievance. Although the scientist tried hard to explain his stand however, nothing worked in his favor.

In one of the communications to the Grievance Redressal Committee, Rao wrote, “I am a successful officer and I have been awarded with DAE group achievement award for indigenization associated work. My feedback given to the PMO which is converted as my grievance is not aimed at any individual.”

However, DAE has not relented and on February 10, it had sent out a letter to Rao reminding him that his job was limited to helping him in maintenance of NFC.

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

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

PMO

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

14 Comments

Mar 13 2015 : The Economic Times (Delhi)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

BUREAUCRATIC NIGHTMARE

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

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

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

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

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

Drdo

Nuclear scientist lands in trouble with DAE for sending suggestions to PM Narendra Modi

1 Comment

By ET Bureau | 13 Mar, 2015, 04.00AM IST
By Manu Pubby

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

ET has reviewed the relevant correspondence between the PMO, DAE and the scientist. The PMO didn’t respond to ET’s queries on this matter. Rao did not participate in this story. DAE responded to ET’s questions.

On September 28, 2014, Rao sent his suggestions to PM’s official portal (pmindia. gov.in), which invites citizens to share ideas as well as to write to the Prime Minister.

But although Rao had communicated sensitive matters on the new nuclear complex, the PMO had sent them to Rao’s employer, DAE, marking them as ‘grievance’, and it sent a mail to Rao on January 21 this year, saying his ‘grievance’ has been disposed.

nfcThe PMO’s communication to Rao’s employers had also given the name and designation of the scientist, thus making his full identity known to his superiors. This started a process of DAE relentlessly asking for explanations from the scientist and the latter desperately seeking to explain himself. Some DAE officials who did not want to be identified told ET that Rao may face serious consequences.

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

Dandriyal had asked what guidelines the PMO follows when dealing with ‘sensitive’ communication from government officials. He said the PMO reply that came a month later, on February 27, said the request is being processed, and details are being collected. Rao’s suggestions sent to the prime minister on the Kota project contained, apart from technical details on cutting costs, a proposal that an independent team be appointed to review the project.

BUREAUCRATIC NIGHTMARE

But the PMO sending his suggestions as ‘grievance’ to DAE has put the top nuclear scientist in a bureaucratic nightmare.

The PMO’s communications were sent to NFC, Hyderabad, where Rao worked, and his superiors have turned the matter into staff grievance’ and have been seeking explanations from Rao. In a series of communications, Rao tried to explain that he did not have any personal grievance.

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

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

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

Drdo

Over Rs 16,000 cr spent, DRDO yet to finish vital projects

4 Comments

sunday gaurdians 8th march 1

 

The first of the LCAs was handed over to IAF 32 years after the project started.

ABHINANDAN MISHRA New Delhi | 7th Mar 2015

Vital defence projects that have been taken up by the country’s premier Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) over the last several years, do not show any signs of completion despite thousands of crores of taxpayers’ money spent on them.

Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar, while detailing the nine major DRDO projects that have not been able to meet their deadlines, stated in Parliament that Rs 16,708 crore have been spent on these projects that were scheduled to be completed years ago.

Some of these projects, such as the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), Tejas, Phase II, which was expected to be completed by December 2008, has now been pushed to the end of this month. The government had sanctioned Rs 5,777 crore for this project. The first of the LCAs, which was conceived in 1983, was handed over to the Indian Air Force (IAF) in January this year by Parrikar, 32 years after the project started.

Similarly, the probable date of completion of the Naval Light Combat Aircraft (LCA, Navy) Phase I, which was expected to be completed by March 2010, is under revision. One of the reasons submitted by the Defence Minister for the delay is that “technology challenges have been significantly higher than originally anticipated”. The sanctioned cost of this project is Rs 1,714.98 crore

The probable date of completion of another much talked about project, Aero Engine Kaveri, which was supposed to be completed by December 1996, is also under revision. Sources within DRDO claim that the project, for which the government had sanctioned Rs 2,839 crore, is likely to be shelved

The Air Borne Early Warning & Control (AEW&C) System, for which the government has sanctioned Rs 2,275 crore, is running four years behind the probable date of completion. It was supposed to be handed over to the IAF in October 2011. This has now been postponed to December 2015.

Another crucial project, Long Range Surface-to-Air Missile (LR-SAM), which was allotted Rs 2,606.02 crore is also running four years behind its completion date. It was supposed to be completed by May 2011, but the DRDO has now promised to finish it by December 2015.

The helicopter version third generation anti tank guided missile, whose promised date of completion was December 2010, is now expected to be completed by January 2018. Air-to-air missile Astra too is running four years behind its scheduled date of completion and is expected to be ready by December 2016.

The project on the dual colour missile approach warning system for fighter aircraft and advanced lightweight torpedo, which were to be completed by the DRDO in 2013, are now likely to be executed by the latter part of 2015. For the financial year 2013-14, a total of Rs 10,610.17 crore was allocated to DRDO, of which Rs 5,552.57 crore was in revenue and Rs 5,057.60 crore was in capital.

A senior official with the DRDO stated that the “culture” of promoting scientists who are unable to complete their projects on time, instead of reprimanding them is a big factor behind the delays that have become synonymous with DRDO.

“The practice of seeking extensions for a project, one after another, has been condoned by successive Defence Ministers. Why would a scientist want to complete his project on time if he knows that even if he does not complete it on time, the project will be extended and he will continue to work on the same project? Scientists who retire are given extensions because they have been working on a project, so they would naturally want the project to go on and on,” the official stated.

According to Parrikar, the government has taken many corrective measures to complete the ongoing projects on time like three-tier project monitoring and constituting a Project Monitoring Review Committee (PMRC). However, DRDO officials claimed that he was only repeating what has been said by Defence Ministers who came before him.

“Consortium approach, three-tier project monitoring approach, Project Monitoring Review Committee (PMRC) and Project Appraisal and Review Committee (PARC) have been there in the DRDO for the last 10-15 years. There is no new remedy which Parrikar has tried to suggest,” the official claimed.

Comments –

Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar, while detailing the delay in nine major DRDO projects vide Parliament question No 789 by Hon MP Nishikant Dubey from BJP and answered on 27 Feb 2015. As Per annexure ‘A; serial No 3 Aero Engine Kaveri, DRDo answer was technical bla bla the real delay reason the incompetent, corrupt, immoral scientist led the project.

Mr. T Mohan Rao, Director GTRE who was picked up by the Karnataka police during a raid on a high-end spa cum-massage parlour in Jaya-mahal on 11th May 2011 at 11 PM with the Mr V N Narayan, Agent Israeli firm ILN Technologies Inc.

T Mohana Rao is Director of the Gas Turbine Research institute (GTRE), a DRDO wing involved in the manufacture of Kaveri, India’s first indigenous jet engine for LCA Tejas. According to the police, Mohana Rao had claimed at the time of the arrest, “I have come to fix an appointment for
my wife for tomorrow.” Mohana Rao also allegedly lied to the police that he was a consultant with aeronautics space research and was a resident of Vimanapura in HAL. In 2008, Mohana
Rao and the GTRE team were awarded the Dr V M Ghatge national award for his outstanding contribution in the field of aerospace technology. Mohana Rao is also chairperson of the Bangalore branch of Aeronautical Society of India and the Chairperson of the township advisory committee of C V Raman Nagar, where most DRDO personnel live.

This is the tip of Ice the berg, Sh Avinash Chander down fall because of his immoral act to made Ms Tessy Thamos firstly Distinguished scientist ignoring lot of deserving scientists and after that made him Director, ASL again ignoring deserve candidates and finally made her husband CMDR S K Patel incompetent man recruited and appointed as director QRS violated all norms.

These types of cases are real reasons of
delaying in DRDO mission oriented projects.

 

shiva the destroyer • 14 hours ago

only solution to such kind of delays and carelessness is privatisation of DRDO…

Drdo

Top DRDO Scientist Accused of Sexual Harassment – The New Indian Express

13 Comments

Author: Pradip R Sagar

Published Date: Mar 8, 2015 6:00 AM

Last Updated: Mar 8, 2015 5:10 AM

A 25­ years­ old Junior Research Fellow has filed a complaint against D Majumdar, additional director of DIPAS, of making sexual advances.

NEW DELHI: After well­ known environmental scientist Dr R K Pachauri faces allegations of sexual harassment by his junior woman colleague, a senior scientist of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO),the country’s premier defence research body, too is facing similar charges by a junior researcher.

A 25 ­year ­old Junior Research Fellow has accused 59­ year­ old Dr D Majumdar, the additional director of the DRDO’s Delhi ­based Defence Institute of Physiology and Allied Sciences (DIPAS), of sexually harassing her. Taking cognizance of the woman’s complaint, Majumdar has been shunted out in ‘public interest’ following the recommendations of a high ­level committee, which was set up by the DRDO, to look into the allegations

According to official sources, the woman, who joined DIPAS in December last year, filed a complaint with the head of the organisation in February. In her complaint to Dr Shashi Bala Singh, Director, DIPAS, the woman accused Majumdar of making sexual advances towards her and she also sought her transfer from the particular group of Ergonomics. The woman alleged that Majumdar used to sexually harass her on his office premises. Over 40 other fellow researchers also came in support of the woman complainant and gave their representation against Majumdar. Subsequently her complaint was forwarded to the DRDO headquarters and a five­ member committee headed by Hina Gokhale, Director HRD of the DRDO, was formed to look into the allegations, as per the Vishakha Guidelines formulated by the Supreme Court.

Majumdar, who is retiring by the end of 2015, has been transferred to a Gwalior ­based laboratory where he has been directed to report by March 16. When contacted, Majumdar defended himself and said that the allegation was a conspiracy. “I completely denied such allegations and it is a conspiracy to defame me. Surprisingly, hours after appearing before the committee on March 3, I received my transfer orders from the headquarters,” said Majumdar, Scientist G of the DRDO, which is equivalent to a Joint Secretary ­rank officer. While deposing before the committee, he reportedly handed over six testimonials from junior scientists in his favour.

However, the complainant didn’t comment. When contacted, Dr. Shashi Bala Singh said, “I will not be able to make any comment on it. Please contact my headquarters.”

But DRDO Spokesperson Ravi Gupta said, “We (DRDO) follows strict regulations, whenever such allegations come out in the department. Since in this matter, a committee is already constituted and looking into the matter, it would be inappropriate for me to comment on its proceedings.”

Experiment with Controversies DIPAS was recently in the news for carrying out a study for faster deployment of troops for high ­altitude operations in case of war ­like situation, which was rubbished by the Indian Army. In fact, army severely criticised the methods adopted by the DIPAS scientists to collect data sample for its study. DIPAS was set up after the Indo ­China war in 1962 with the thrust area identification of high altitude physiology, nutrition and biochemistry of human in and also with the urgent need felt for ergonomic assessment of workstations and machine interface. The laboratory carries out various researches and studies to look into the aspect of high altitude warfare.

 

Drdo

RTI-DRDO-DMSRDE- Repeat orders

2 Comments

To,                                                                                                 22nd February 2015
Dr. RB Sharma, CPIO,
DRDO HQ, Min. of Defence,
DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg,
New Delhi-110011

Hello,
Kindly provide me with the following information requested under the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in respect of  repeat order placed by Dr. A.K. Saxena, Director , DMSRDE, Kanpur.

As a matter of fact procurement cases under Global/Open/Limited tender takes longer time in finalization and as only few months left for superannuation (31st July 2015) of Dr. A.K. Saxena, thereby he is issuing repeat orders without any requirements of instrument/equipment/material so that cases may be materialised during his tenure.

Information sought –

  1. The number of repeat order placed in financial year 2013-2014 with repeat order justification.
  2. The number of repeat order placed in financial year 2014-2015 with repeat order justification.
  3. Output of item before placing the repeat order i.e. if item is equipment than logbook of uses, if material than product output.

The information is related to corruption not come under schedule –II exemption please finds enclose repeat order examples.

Enclose – TWO CASES OF REPEAT ORDER  

Regards

Prabhu Dandriyal,
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun -248008
0135- 2787750, 9411114879,
prabhudoon@gmail.com, www.corruptionindrdo.com

Registration Number            MODEF/R/2015/60436repeat order example

Drdo

Perform or perish

2 Comments

by Harsh Pant Wednesday, 4 February 2015 dna

The Modi government has done the right thing by jolting an ossified bureaucracy

India’s ossified bureaucracy is being shuffled like never before. The most recent development in this realm has been the rather dramatic sacking of Sujatha Singh from the post of the Foreign Secretary and the appointment of S Jaishankar to that position. The rumours about this development were floating around for quite some time. Still, when the decision actually came to replace Singh about seven months before the end of her tenure, it ended up sending shock waves through the complacent Indian foreign policy establishment.

No one seems to be contesting that Jaishankar is a great choice. Yet the critics of the decision have largely focused on bureaucratic niceties by suggesting Jaishankar’s appointment not only curtailed Singh’s career but also ended up blocking the career prospects of some senior Indian Foreign Service (IFS) officers. The reaction of the Congress Party has been rather strange with former information and broadcasting minister Manish Tewari trying to link the action to the Khobragade episode involving an IFS officer who was jailed in the US two years ago for allegedly mistreating her maid. He tweeted: “Is sacking of Foreign Secretary late retribution for her stand on Devyani Khobragade affair? Removal after a Presidential visit ‘coincidental’?”

Such criticisms of the government’s decision are missing the key point. This decision should be viewed as part of a larger, and much needed, bureaucratic shake-up that the Prime Minister is engendering. Just two weeks ago, the government had also terminated the appointment of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) chief Avinash Chander, 15 months before his contract was to end.

Prime Ministers till now have devoted, at best, occasional interest in nuclear and strategic policy issues, mainly preferring to delegate substantial levels of policy making discretion to organisations like the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) and the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO). The conduct of the DRDO has been largely driven by an effort to protect its direct communicative link to the Prime Minister, secure recurrent generous funding, and maintain a high level of autonomy. Given its significant budgetary resources in the context of a developing nation, DRDO has repeatedly failed in delivering quality output. Major projects of the DRDO including the Light Combat Aircraft Tejas, Nag missile, Long-range Surface-to-Air missile project and the Airborne Early Warning and Control System have either not been completed on time or have resulted in huge cost overruns. It took the agency almost a decade and a half to operationalise the Agni-I.

The inattention or inability of the Prime Minister’s office so far to take concrete steps to improve the DRDO’s performance and compel it to cooperate with other defence bureaucratic stakeholders has permitted it a remarkable degree of self-governance in budgetary prioritisation, project design and delivery time-scale planning, and setting operational policy through regular statements outlining the doctrinal meaning of DRDO products. Prime Minister Modi had criticised the DRDO for its chalta hai attitude during an address in Kargil in August last year when he had said, “If a project was conceived in 1992, it should not be the case in 2014 we are still saying it will take some more time.” And in December last year, India’s Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence had censured the DRDO, accusing it of shoddy research, chronic inefficiency, inordinate delays, corruption and its penchant for reverse engineering. The government seems to have taken the bull by the horns and removed Chander to ensure some semblance of accountability in the organisation.

The appointment of Jaishankar as foreign secretary is also along the same lines that merit would be rewarded. The Indian Foreign Service (IFS) needs to recognise that business as usual is no longer enough. At a time when India’s global imprint is expanding rapidly, a risk-averse foreign policy bureaucracy will not be able to meet the aspirations of the nation. The idea that seniority should determine who should be the nation’s top diplomat is an idea whose time has long gone. But bureaucratic resistance has prevented any substantive reforms in the service. There are hardly any incentives to perform and hardly any penalties for underperformance.

As a result, nearly everyone in the diplomatic service manages to rise to the upper echelons. Despite the fact that the best and the brightest are no longer attracted to the IFS, there have been few attempts to cultivate outside expertise, with hardly any opportunities for lateral entry or temporary rotations. In fact, it was Manmohan Singh who had wanted to introduce lateral entry in the Indian bureaucracy in his first term but the idea was quietly killed by the bureaucracy (who else?). Personnel are scarce and demands are growing on the IFS but Indian diplomats have not managed to transform the service and change its character to suit the needs of the time. Is it any wonder then that ad hocism pervades Indian foreign policy thinking?

Bureaucracies, if not competently led and directed, tend to morph into interest groups with a focus on preserving their own institutional privileges. In democracies, effective political control and guidance is absolutely critical if the role of bureaucracies is not to become corrosive on policymaking. It is in the nature of bureaucracies to be risk-averse. Leave them alone and they will muddle along the path of least resistance, trying to increase their power by resisting change. The Modi government is right in shaking things up and making Indian bureaucracies more accountable and effective. But much more remains to be done!

The author teaches at King’s College, London