Tag Archives: year

Drdo

RTI- Dr. Ajay Kumar Singh – Singh is Kingh

6 Comments
To,                                                                                      31st March 2014
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 Dr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Scientist  G  is presently holding the charge of DOP, DRDO  at DRDO HQ. He is holding following post in DRDO since January 2007. Details are given as under:

SN    Post                                                 Duration                           Directorate
1.      Staff Officer to CC(R&D) (HR) – Oct 2004- Dec 2006            DRDO HQ, DRDO,
2.      Director                                            Jan  2007 – Sep 2010        CEPTAM, DRDO,  
3.      Director                                            Oct 2010 – 27 Feb 2013   Dte. of  HRD, DRDO HQ,
4.     Director                                           28 Feb 2013 – till date      DOP, DRDO HQ    
Note:     He was holding the charge of two Directorates as Director, DHRD & Director, DOP from 01 Dec 2012 to 27 Feb 2013

In reference to the above kindly provide the following information under RTI Act 2005.

  1. Procedure/Guidelines/Rules for appointment of Directors in Corporate Directorate/RAC/CEPTAM, DRDO duly approved by DOPT, Government of India.
  2. Criteria for appointment of Directors in Corporate Directorate/RAC/CEPTAM (Seniority/Administrative & Management skill, qualification & experience etc.)
  3. Charter of Duties & Nature of work  carried out by Scientist appointed as:
          I.            Staff Officer to Chief Controller R&D(HR)
        II.            Director, CEPTAM
      III.            Director, DHRD
      IV.            Director, DOP
  1. File noting for appointment of Dr. Ajay Kumar Singh as Staff Officer to CCR&D (HR) & copy of appointment order
  2. File noting for appointment of Dr. Ajay Kumar Singh as Director, CEPTAM & copy of his appointment order
  3. File noting for appointment of Dr. Ajay Kumar Singh as Director, DHRD, DRDO HQ & copy of his appointment order
  4. File noting for appointment of Dr. Ajay Kumar Singh as Director, DOP & copy of his appointment order
  5. List of Scientist considered in the appointment of following post by DRDO Hqrs.
  6. Administrative & Managerial Experience and Educational Qualification of Dr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Scientist F as on Jan 2007 when he was appointed as Director, CEPTAM, DRDO.
  1. Director, CEPTAM  Jan 2007- Sept 2010
  2. Director, DHRD  Oct 2010- Feb 2013
  3. Director, DOP  March 2013- Jan 2014

NOTE – Matter is directly related to corruption and not exempted under Section 24 (1) because  Dr. Ajay Kumar Singh as Director, DHRD was part & parcel of implementing interview in promotion of scientist F to scientist G grade without proper amendment in SRO ( Violation of Article 309).  He was also one of the candidates for scientist F to scientist G promotion in year 2011 assessment.

  1. Please refer CIC decision in File No. CIC/LS/A/2012/002612 dated 22.3.2013 (Dr. Neelam Bhalla Vs. DRDO)-  
  2. Information asked is on Establishment Matter and not exempted u/s 24 of RTI Act as per various decisions of CIC.

Regards

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

 

Registration Number    MODEF/R/2014/60617       

Drdo

DRDO corruption’s Heights that they even not leave the Knowledge Corner (Library)

1 Comment
To                                                                                                    3rd March 2014
Sh A K Antony.
Defence Minster,
Room -104, South Block,
New Delhi – 110011

Subject: DRDO corruption’s Heights that they even not leave the Knowledge Corner (Library)

Honorable Sir,

To enhance the knowledge of DRDO scientists and make them updated, Ministry of Defence provide library grant generously. Apart from this the pay commission has recommended special assistance for the purchasing of books/journals to individuals scientist.

The library budget of DRDO’s laboratory is a lucrative assignment for corrupt scientists. The scientist library in-charge has direct access to head of establishment.

The case of corruption in library procurement was first exposed at DIAT, Pune, where then In-charge Library Dr A K Tyagi, Sc ‘F’ did financial manipulation in Library. CVC has been found prima facie material against Dr A K Tyagi.  And Regular Disciplinary action was recommended on: 9/9/2013. Consequently DRDO Hqrs finally charge sheeted on 8th October 2013. Charge Sheet signed by Honorable Defence Minister, Sh A K Antony.

The case of Dr A K Tyagi, Sc ‘G’ is not an isolated case but DRDO labs in general have misusing the library grants and if serious enquiry is set up every lab will give foul smell.

The recent example of DMSRDE, Kanpur’s library procurement cases revealed the astonishing facts and figures of library procurement. The RTI helped to expose the corrupt practice prevailing in library procurements.

Enclosed case revealed that the DMSRDE officials are not following the DRDO Purchase Manual -2006. Even after cancellation of Supply Orders on 23 August 2012 the invoices dated 02 May 2012 were accepted while Supply Orders were placed on 27 April 2012. Thereby mischievously & fraudulently the supply of books were accepted in back date to get fatty commission from these vendors. This gross violation of rules & blunder took place even after cancellations of Supply Orders establish conspiracy against Government by Mr.  Jitendra Yadav and Dr. A.K. Saxena.

DRDO has become hub of corruption and honorable defence minister is requested to take a strong action to prevent further damage of moral and ethics.

Regards

Prabhu  Dandriyal,
21-Sunderwala, Raipur,
Phone 0135- 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,
e-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com  website www.corruptionindrdo.com
 
Enclosed : Copy Complaint to CVC dated 3rd March 2014
 
To                                                                                                                                            3rd March 2014The Central Vigilance CommissionerCentral Vigilance CommissionSatarkta Bhawan, A- Block, GPO Complex, INANew Delhi-110023SUBJECT: CORRUPTION IN PROCUREMENT OF SCIENTIFIC & TECHNICAL BOOKS at DMSRDECOMPLAINT AGAINST Mr. JITENDRA YADAV, SCIENTIST ‘E’, Head, Technical Library and Dr. ARVIND KUMAR SAXENA, DIRECTOR, DMSRDE, KANPURSir,

BRIEF FACTS OF THE COMPLAINT

 

  1. Defence Materials & Stores Research & Development Establishment (DMSRDE), Kanpur is an establishment under Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO), Min. of Defence, DRDO Bhawan, New Delhi.
  2. Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director, DMSRDE, Kanpur and Mr. Jitendra Yadav, Scientist ‘E’ are posted in DMSRDE, Kanpur. Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena is Director, DMSRDE with effect from 01 January 2011.
  3. Complainant is retired Government servant from DRDO. Presently complainant is working as RTI activist and social worker to expose the Corruption in DRDO and other Government departments. Complainant is running a website corruptionindrdo.com for posting information related to Corruption and Financial irregularities in various establishments under DRDO.
  4. Technical Library, DMSRDE is having annual budget of about Rs. 1.50 crore for procurement of Printed Journals (Periodicals S&T – Rs. 1.10 crore), Online Science Direct e-Journals (Rs. 25 Lakh) and S&T Books (Rs. 15 Lakh).
  5. Mr. Jitendra Yadav, Scientist ‘E’ was appointed as Head, Technical Library in DMSRDE Kanpur vide Daily Order-I No. 29/AD dated 19.02.2012.
  6. An application under RTI Act 2005 was filed to Mr. Sarvesh Kumar, Scientist ‘F’, Central Public Information Officer, DMSRDE, Kanpur by complainant on 25th July 2013 regarding “Procurement of Scientific & Technical Books in Technical Library of DMSRDE”. Copy of the RTI dated 25th July 2013 is enclosed as Annexure-1.
  7. CPIO, DMSRDE, Kanpur replied by letter No. DMS/0369/RTI/101/41/Letter_2013 dated 26th August 2013. Copy of CPIO reply dated 26th   August 2013 is enclosed as Annexure-2. CPIO, DMSRDE provided partial information and it was informed by CPIO that fund expenditure in procurements of S&T Books in Technical Library in DMSRDE in respective years was as follows:

libtable1

8.     Complainant was not satisfied with reply of CPIO and First Appeal dated 07 Sep 2013 was filed to First Appellate Authority, DRDO. By Order No. RTI/02/2091/F/2013/0142 dated 14 Oct 2013, First Appellate Authority DRDO ordered CPIO, DMSRDE to provide full information sought in RTI dated 25th July 2013. Copy of First Appellate Authority Order dated 14 Oct 2013 is enclosed as Annexure-3

9.     CPIO, DMSRDE seek additional fee for information vide his letter dated 30 October 2013. Copy of the letter is enclosed as Annexure-4. Vide letter No. DMS/0369/RTI/FAR/2013/0013 dated 14 Nov 2013, CPIO provided information in 60 pages and in covering letter CPIO informed that No supply Order has been placed in FY 2010-2011 and No tender was called during FY 2010-2011 and 2012-2013. Copy of the letter dated 14 Nov 2013 is enclosed as Annexure-5..

1o.   The figures in information provided by CPIO were found self-contradictory and false as evident from summary of the information provided by CPIO.

libtable211.    On perusal of the documents provided by CPIO, following noticeable information has been found. 

           a.     Seven invoices were found for the financial year 2009-2010 with following details: 
libtable3libtable4libtable5libtable6libtable7libtable8

         b.      Supply Orders were issued by Head, Technical Library in FY 2012-13 for Procurement of Scientific & Technical books with following details:

  1. Terms & Conditions of Supply Order as per DRDO Manual is enclosed as Annexure-13.
  2. libtable9libtable10libtable11
  3. c.       Supply Order-1, Supply Order-2, Supply Order-3 and Supply Order-4 dated 27 April 2012 as mentioned in point(b) above were cancelled after 117 days on 23 August 2012 by Mr. Jitendra Yadav, Head Technical Library due to non-supply of books within delivery period of 90 days. It was mentioned in Para (2) of Terms & Conditions of Supply Order “This supply order shall automatically stand cancelled w.e.f. the next day after the date of delivery mentioned in this order”. Therefore supply orders were automatically stand cancelled after 90 days from issue of Supply Order (27 April 2012) i.e. w.e.f.  27 July 2012. Copies of letters No. TL/0510/WBF-2012 dated 23rd August 2012 issued for cancellation of supply orders to four vendors are enclosed as Annexure-24 to Annexure-27.
  4. d.         Twenty two invoices were found for the financial year 2012-2013 with following details:libtable12libtable13libtable14libtable15
  5. e.  Books were supplied against four supply orders that were cancelled on 23 August 2012. The fake invoices were fabricated from back date but actual supplies of books were made after cancellation of supply order. This smack conspiracy, manipulation and tampering of records for Corruption.
  7. 12.      During the FY 2012-2013 the following irregularities, gross violations of rules, loss of public fund and Corruption took place in procurement of Books.

  8. MAJOR FINANCIAL IRREGULARITIES & BLUNDERS IN PROCUREMENT OF BOOKS BY  MR. JITEDNRA YADAV, SCIENTIST ‘E’ & DR. A.K. SAXENA, DIRECTOR

    1)          DRDO Manual of Procedures for Management of Libraries and TIC 1999 as amended and Purchase Management 2006 as amended are being used in DMSRDE, Kanpur for procurement of books & periodicals. Rule 4.2 of Chapter 4 (ACQUISITION) of Manual is applicable for procurement of Books & Monographs. Copy of relevant rules of chapter 4 are enclosed as Annexure-50.

    2)           As per Rule 4.2.2 of this Manual selection of vendors should be made on the basis of their past services provided to the library, distributorship of publishers and infrastructure available with them. In the years 2009-2010, 2010-2011 & 2011-2012 there was almost no supply of books and only three vendors get supply orders in 2009-2010 and supplied books. Also these vendors offered 30% discount on books (Foreign & Indian).

    3)          In the FY 2009-2010 mode of tendering was limited tender of PM 2006 to get better discount and competition to save public money and this results 30% discount on books.

    4)          In FY 2012-2013 violations of rules and procedures of procurement of books were grossly violated to achieve fatty commission that results financial loss to exchequer. Supply Orders were issued to vendors without keeping in view the past services of the vendors. This results cancellation of all supply orders that took place on 27 April 2012. Hence these vendors should be blacklisted for further procurement of books in Library. But even after non-supply and automatic cancellation of supply orders after expiry of delivery period of 90 days, the supply orders were issued to same vendors on 17 August 2012.

    5)          Supply Orders were placed on single tender and 10% discount to pet vendors of Dr. A.K. Saxena, Director and all vendors were from New Delhi only. Adopting the process of single tender with 10% discount without following previously adopted procedure of limited tender where vendors were offering discount of 35% – 40% on purchase of foreign books, resulted huge loss of public money and commission making by Mr. Jitendra Yadav and Dr. A.K. Saxena.

    6)          Even after cancellation of Supply Orders on 23 August 2012 the invoices dated 02 May 2012 were accepted while Supply Orders were placed on 27 April 2012. Thereby mischievously & fraudulently the supply of books were accepted in back date to get fatty commission from these vendors. This gross violation of rules & blunder took place even after cancellations of Supply Orders establish conspiracy against Government by Mr.  Jitendra Yadav and Dr. A.K. Saxena.

    7)          There was no procedure followed for selection of books. In fact there was no requirement of books from Scientists as no demands were made. There was no procurement of books in past two years and only Rs. 94833.00 was expenditure in purchase of books in FY 2009-2010.

    8)          It is crystal clear that Corruption took place in FY 2012-2013 where all of sudden books of Rs. 1467810.00 has been procured while in previous years it was “NIL” or very less Rs. 94833.00 only in 2009-10. Demand of books which was NIL (Zero) in 2010-11 and 2011-12 has increased all of sudden near about to the Rupees 15 Lakh. As compared to purchase of books in FY 2009-10 the hike in 2012-13 is about 15.5 times. This indicates that books were purchased without any need and requirement just to earn fatty commission.

    9)          DRDO is having very old manual issued on 11 January 1999 regarding Management of Library/TIC of DRDO. This manual is called as “DRDO Manual of Procedures for Management of Libraries & Technical Information Centres“. After issuance of Purchase Manual -2006 of DRDO this old Manual became ineffective & obsolete. Most of the DRDO Labs/Estt. are using Purchase Manual for procurement of books, Print Journal and Online E-Journals. DMSRDE is also using PM-2006 from last six years for procurement of books, Print  Journal and Online E-Journals as can be verified from records of Technical Library of DMSRDE, Kanpur. All of sudden making purchase of books on the basis of old manual smacks malafide intentions and leads corruption in purchase of books in FY 2012-2013. In fact in year 2012-2013 provisions of DRDO Manual of Procedures for Management of Libraries & Technical Information Centres has not been fully followed. Purchase procedures of DRDO Manual are for small & urgent procurement not for big procurements in tune of lakh or crores.

    10)      Fatty Commission in Procurement of books in FY 2012-2013: Books of Rs. 1467810.60 were purchased at discount of 10% only while in year 2009-2010 the discount on books was 30%. Even in FY 2011-2012 the offered discount by vendors were 35% and now days vendors are offering 40% discount on foreign books. Therefore books were purchased at very high prices on very low discount of 10% only with gross violation & spirit of Purchase Procedures to get maximum discount in open competition under limited tender to save public money. Therefore Rs. 440343.00 (30% of 1467810.00) had taken as fatty commission by Mr. Jitendra Yadav and Dr. A.K. Saxena, Director, DMSRDE.

    11)      Fraudulent supply of books with fake invoices: In FY 2012-2013 four vendors   submitted invoices dated 02 May 2012 against the supply orders dated 27 April 2012 while these Supply orders were cancelled on 23 August 2012 by Mr. Jitednra Yadav, Scientist ‘E’ , Head, Technical Library. The supply on 02 May 2012 was impossible as it takes at least 5 days to reach speed post from DMSRDE dispatch section to the respective vendor. The details /entries of invoices shows that these invoices were not diarised at Director Office central registry and directly entertained by Head, Technical Library. Besides the verification records like receiving of invoices & books at Technical Library, envelops of invoices, CRV, payments by ACDA & records at Finance Division will disclose the whole conspiracy made in procurement of books in back date even after cancellation of supply orders.

    12)      Splitting of consolidated demand of books in four parts: Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena split the consolidated demand of books in four parts and misused his official position & powers so that he can get fatty commission from his pet vendors. The books should be procured in one consolidated demands with proper negotiations with vendors to get maximum discount offered in open market. Four supply orders were issued on 27 April 2012 to four vendors that were not made any supply in past four financial years in DMSRDE. This splitting of books demand leads loss to public fund and Corruption of Rs. 440343.00 by Mr. Jitendra Yadav and Dr. A.K. Saxena, Director, DMSRDE. Sprit of Purchase Rules and CVC Guidelines is that “The proposals shall not be split merely to bring them within the delegated powers”.

    CHARGES ON DR. ARVIND KUMAR SAXENA, DIRECTOR, DMSRDE

    1. Misuse of power & position for personal gain
    2. Splitting of demands of books in four parts to get fatty commission
    3. Planned conspiracy to accept supply even after cancellation of Supply Orders

    CHARGES ON MR. JITENDRA, SCIENTIST ‘E’, HEAD, TECHNICAL LIBRARY

    i.            Planned conspiracy for Corruption in procurement of books in FY 2012-2013 to earn fatty commission from vendors by issuing supply orders on only 10% discount

    ii.            Gross violation of rules in selection of vendors, splitting of demands

    iii.            Acceptance of supply even after cancellation of supply orders with tampering of records in back date

    iv.            Misconduct under Rule 3.(1) (iii) of CCS(Conducts) Rules 1964

    Therefore, in light of the above mentioned facts and evidences, I may kindly request  you to issue order for inquiry and disciplinary action against Mr. Jitendra Yadav, Scientist‘E’ and Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director, DMSRDE by CVO, Ministry of Defence.

    Regards

    Prabhu  Dandriyal,
    21-Sunderwala, Raipur,
    Phone 0135- 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,
    e-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com  website www.corruptionindrdo.com
  9.  

 

 

Drdo

RTI- DRDO Hqrs – LTC Scam

Leave a comment
To,                                                                               19th  February 2014
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 to LTC  availed by DTRL,LASTEC officials /staff who travelled by Air India LTC – 80 scheme in financial year 2012 – 2013 and 2013 – 2014.

As per   Sh G S Malik, Director, DTRL, DRDO letter to Director Vigilance vide letter No DTRL/Dir/Vig_LTC/2014 dated 3rd January 2014 several official claimed LTC using Air India LTC 80 scheme ticket. It is observed that Shri Anil Kumar Maini, Director, LASTEC also received similar written complaint.

  1. Copy of Air India LTC 80 tickets Delhi to Port Blair and back claimed by DTRL and LASTEC officials / staff in financial year 2012 – 2013 and 2013 – 2014.
  2. Copy of complaint received by Shri Anil Kumar Maini, Director, LASTEC, DRDO.
  3. Status of Sh G S Malik, Director, DTRL, DRDO letter No DTRL/Dir/Vig_LTC/2014 dated 3rd January 2014,
  4. if  action taken by DRDO Hqrs on the Sh G S Malik, Director, DTRL, DRDO letter No DTRL/Dir/Vig_LTC/2014 dated 3rd January 2014,  then copy of noting/order

Note : Matter is directly related to corruption and not exempted under Section 24 (1)

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

Registration Number            MODEF/R/2014/60322

Bloger

Management Development Institute suspends professor for plagiarism (Scientific Fraud:Stealing)

2 Comments

Akshaya Mukul, TNN Aug 22, 2013, 01.39AM IST

Prof CNR Rao (India’s science adviser C. N. R. Rao has apologized for not noticing some copied text in a paper published last year.)
Dr R A Mashelkar (CSIR), suspended
Prof. Amit Kapoor (IIT Delhi) Suspended and many more, found guilty as Plagiarism.

NEW DELHI: The HRD ministry’s allegation that Management Development Institute (MDI) associate professor Amit Kapoor had plagiarized from a secret Expenditure Finance Committee note and later claimed copyright over it has resulted in widespread action.
Kapoor has been put under suspension by MDI and Harvard University has promised to carry out an investigation and take appropriate action. Harvard comes into the picture as Kapoor was till recently the honorary chairperson of the Institute of Competitiveness, India, which has been recognized by the Institute of Strategy and Competitiveness at Harvard Business School.

In fact, Kapoor was also given the Competitiveness Hall of Fame award by Harvard University. HRD ministry brought Kapoor’s plagiarism to the notice of Michael Porter, professor of Harvard Business School and an authority on competitiveness, requesting him that the Indian affiliate should be disassociated as well as the Competitiveness Hall of Fame award and any other recognition to Kapoor be withdrawn.
Meanwhile, sources in MDI said Kapoor has explained that most of the so-called secret documents were shared with him by the Planning Commission as it wanted him to prepare an index of competitiveness.
Pawan Agarwal, advisor, Planning Commission, told TOI, “The moment HRD ministry brought plagiarism to our notice, we checked the facts. We have sought his explanation.”
Agarwal admitted there was a case of copyright violation. However, sources in the Planning Commission said, “Kapoor’s presentation on the Rashtriya Uchatar Shiksha Abhiyan plagiarized slides from the HRD ministry’s EFC document but was not meant for public consumption. Planning Commission had shared the EFC note for his views.”
In July, HRD ministry officials were invited to Pennsylvania State University (PSU) to address Academic Leadership Academy (ALA) on Rashtriya Uchchatar Shiksha Abhiyan (RUSA) and other initiatives of the Indian government. Kapoor was also slated to speak as an invited faculty.
When Kapoor’s presentation was shared with HRD officials, it was found that at least four slides of his presentation were direct lifts from the HRD ministry’s EFC note on RUSA. Plagiarism from HRD documents is all over Kapoor’s presentation, be it summary of the RUSA programme, outcome/outputs for RUSA and even the equalization formula is a direct lift with some changes in the weightage.

Plagiarism by the Mashelkar committee?
Posted by Abi
Filed under: Ethics, Law, Misconduct / Fraud
* * *
Update: From the comment on this DesiPundit post, we have this link to the Alternative Law Forum’s web page devoted to the controversy surrounding the Mashelkar committee report. In particular, you will find the ‘original’ Shamnad Basheer report. To make life easier for you, there is a short table which compares the key conclusions of the Mashelkar committee report and those of the original. Quite revealing.
* * *
Chan Park and Achal Prabhala have two op-eds today: the Hindu and the Times of India. In both, they have levelled charges of plagiarism on the committee headed by Dr. R. A. Mashelkar (ex-CEO of the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research) that looked into some technical questions about our patent laws as they relate to pharmaceutical companies. Guru has a nice summary.
Park and Prabhala don’t stop with charges of plagiarism; they also attack the substance of the Mashelkar committee’s conclusions. While the issues are technical (about whether TRIPS, the intellectual property-related agreement that India is a signatory to, allows its member countries some flexibility in deciding what is patentable), they are also political: your position on these issues would depend on your view of pharmaceutical companies, how much of innovation is actually attributable to them, and how fair they are in dealing with poor people. There is a lot of room in the political spectrum for people to choose a spot to sit on.
My own views are informed by the article titled The Truth about Drug Companies by Marcia Angell, ex-Editor in Chief of the New England Journal of Medicine. In it, Angell also builds a compelling case that a big part of the real innovation actually happens in universities (and small start-ups spawned by them) with public funding. She also mounts a scathing attack on the Big Pharma companies, which appear to spend a lot more money on how to rig the system in their favour than on innovation through drug discovery.
And here’s something from today’s NYTimes on the nexus between pharma companies and doctors:
The pharmaceutical industry spends $12 billion a year marketing to doctors, and much of that money is in the form of free samples delivered to doctors’ offices, often accompanied by lunch for the entire staff. When the University of Michigan health systems banned such lunches in 2005, they calculated that the lunches had been worth $2.5 million a year.
The free drugs are samples of the newest and most expensive branded products. The drug industry hopes that by starting patients with free samples, they will remain on the more expensive medication rather than using a cheaper generic. And there is evidence that doctors who have relationships with the pharmaceutical industry prescribe more of the expensive drugs.

Drdo

RTI – Scientist ‘H’ – 2013

2 Comments
To,                                                       1st February 2014
Under Secretary (RR-II)
Central Public Information Officer
DOPT, Min. of Personnel
Room No. 268, North Block
New Delhi-110011                             

SUBJECT: APPLICATION UNDER RTI ACT 2005

Hello,

Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO), Min. of Defence conducts assessment of Scientist ’G’ for the promotion to the grade Scientist ‘H’(Outstanding Scientist) every year in month of June under the provisions of Rule 8(2) of DRDS Rules 1979 as amended and the results are declared in month of July of the same year. The assessment for promotions from Scientist ‘G’ to Scientist ‘H’ (Outstanding Scientist) was conducted in June 2013 for the assessment year 2013 and result was declared in October 2013

In reference to the above kindly provide the following information under RTI Act 2005.

INFORMATION SOUGHT

  1. Certified copy of Minutes of the Peer Committee Meeting for promotion of Scientists ‘G’ to Scientists ‘H’ (Outstanding Scientists) for the year 2013.
  2. Copy of Peer Committee meeting recommendation duly approved by Defence Minister for promotion of Scientists ‘G’ to Scientists ‘H’ (Outstanding Scientists) for the year 2013.
  3. Whether any review Peer Committee meeting was held again in the year 2013 for reviewing the recommendations/Minutes  of previous Peer Committee Meeting held earlier in 2013  for promotion of Scientists ‘G’ to Scientists ‘H’ (Outstanding Scientists) for the year 2013. (Yes/No)
  4. If answer to point(4) is yes then provide the copy of Minutes of review Peer Committee Meeting for promotion of Scientists ‘G’ to Scientists ‘H’ (Outstanding Scientists) for the year 2013.

Regards

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

Registration Number          DOP&T/R/2014/60430         

 

Drdo

DRDO Recruit 500 Scientists this financial year 2014

6 Comments
To
Smt. Sudha Krishnan,
Joint Secretary (Pers), Department of Expenditure,
Room No. 39-A, North Block.
New Delhi – 110001

Subject: DRDO recruit 500 scientists this financial year 2014

The news was published in Times of India “DRDO to recruit 500 more scientists this year” – Vishwas Kothari, TNN Jan 8, 2014,

Directorate of HRD, DRDO vide their letter no DHRD/77001/C/M/010 dated 22 August 2012 conveyed to all Lab Directors/Establishment that the Government for Sanction of additional scientist posts to meet only the immediate and unavoidable critical requirements against the ongoing projects/progarammes as per the advice of Ministry of Finance.

The Lab Directors are therefore to submit scientists’ requirement as per enclosed   “Appendix ‘A’ “

How the government has been fooled and the poor tax payers money is being misused can be observed by “Appendix ‘A’ “, deployment of scientists (DRDS personals)

The Performa “Appendix ‘A’ stats the scientists requirement as under:-

  1. PROJECT/PROGRAMME WISE
  2. NON-PROJECT WISE (TECHNICAL JOBS)
  3. ESTABLISHMENT ACTIVITIES

Two third of scientists are needed for

 dhrd table1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

All these above activity is earlier in DRDO doing by admin allied cadres which were duly approved and sanctioned by Government of India, and come through UPSC recruitment system, but unfortunately in the last week of December 2010 DRDO director’s conclave some directors raised voice against the admin allied officials quoting that  they are creating hurdles by pin pointing the Government orders. The DRDO directors want to run their own rules and they very much sure that the big boundary walls of their territory can stop their all illegal acts in the name of secrecy.  So it was decided in year 2010 itself that they will remove admin allied cadre phase wise.

If you examine the current scenario of each DRDO lab will find everywhere 30 – 40 % scientists are engaged in above mentioned assignment.

The best part of this these scientists who are engaged in admin allied task are enjoying all special perks and allowances which are given specially to scientists in VI pay commissions and also  getting fast promotions in respect of those scientists who are devotedly working in projects/ programs. It is because of their proximity with top management of DRDO.

Due to this incompetency is growing very fast in DRDO. This has resulted into large number of litigation due to incompetent scientists handling the administration and HR activities.

The current ongoing example the grade pay 4800 was inducted without taking proper sanction from Min of Finance and hundreds of effected employees filed case in CAT.

There lot of complaints registered by CVC/CVO MoD in respect of recruitment procedures  were manipulated several times by these incompetent scientists who were looking HRD/Administrations and resulted Sh A K Anthony, Defence Minister recommended a CBI inquiry against 10 top DRDO officials on 29th October 2013.

Major setback is that by implementing this practice of using scientist for sundry task the real scientist losing their interest in work and most of the time either leave the organization or sit idle.

So all these fabricated demand of DRDO may please be thoroughly examined with their time bound impact.

Finance Ministry requested to send their rep to meet admin/ allied officials of DRDO before sanctioning the post of scientist.

Finance Ministry must examine the DO part orders of all respective 52 Labs of DRDO, which will be best way to verification of utilization of scientific / technical manpower of DRDO.

Regards

                                                                                                                        25th January 2014
Prabhu Dandriyal                                                                                                                            
21-Sunderwal, Raipur, Dehradun -248008                                                                             
0135-2787750 – 91-9411114879                                                                
prabhudoon@gmail.com,  www.corruptionindrdo.com
 
Enclosed :  DHRD, DRDO letter no DHRD/77001/C/M/010 dated 22 August 2012 dhrd page1
dhrd page11
 
 
dhrd page12
 
dhrd page13
 
dhrd page15
 

DRDO to recruit 500 more scientists this year

Vishwas Kothari, TNN, Jan 8, 2014, 03.24AM IST

PUNE: The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) plans to recruit 500 additional scientists this year to meet its workforce requirement across different levels and projects.

“Our present recruitment is focused on filling vacancies that arise from retirements and resignations. However, considering the kind of projects we have been working on, we have moved a proposal with the Union government for an additional recruitment of 500 scientists,” DRDO’s human resources (HR) chief Malakondaiah said on Tuesday. “The government had asked us to file the proposal projecting our need,” he added.

The collective cost of DRDO’s ongoing projects, including Aakash missile, light combat aircraft ‘Tejas’ and Brahmos missile, is worth Rs 1.6 lakh crore. The organisation has close to 7,500 scientists as part of its existing force, he said.

Malakondaiah, who is chief controller of research and development (HR), was in the city to address the valedictory function of the 71-member ‘batch-18’ of the Post Induction Training School (POINTS) at the Defence Institute of Advanced Technology (DIAT), a deemed university under the DRDO in Girinagar here.

Started in March 2003, POINTS is an initiative to impart integrated training to newly inducted scientists in the beginning of their career in DRDO laboratories and projects. So far, the school has trained 3,394 scientists from 17 batches and the 18th batch was the first of its kind, comprising graduates and postgraduates only from the Indian Institutes of Technology, Indian Institute of Science and DIAT.

Malakondaiah said, “Unlike conventional industries like information technology, DRDO is facing an almost negligible rate of attrition vis-a-vis resignations, which contributes barely one per cent of the arising vacancies. This is due to the fact that the Sixth Pay Commission has vastly reduced the gap in the pay scales offered by DRDO and private corporate bodies. This has also helped the organisation to attract and retain young scientific talent emerging from the IITs and IISc.” The additional recruitments will go a long way in resolving some of the issues related to the shortfall of workforce in projects across DRDO, he added.

Meanwhile, POINTS programme director Ajay Misra gave an overview about the training activities at the valedictory session, while DIAT vice-chancellor Prahlada addressed the young scientists. Deputy director D Srikanth was also present.

Drdo

CORRUPTION IN PROCUREMENT OF CHEMICALS AT DMSRDE KANPUR

6 Comments
To                                                                                                          
Central Vigilance Commissioner,
Central Vigilance Commission,
SatarktaBhawan, A- Block, GPO Complex, INA
New Delhi-110023

SUBJECT:      MULTI-CRORE SCAM CORRUPTION IN PROCUREMENT OF CHEMICALS IN DMSRDE KANPUR COMPLAINT AGAINST

  1. MR. AMIT SARAIYA, SCIENTIST ‘D’, HEAD MATERIALS MANAGEMENT GROUP (MMG),
  2. DR. DARSHAN LAL, CHAIRMAN ‘STORES PRUCHASE COMMITTEE’  
  3. Dr. ARVIND KUMAR SAXENA, DIRECTOR, DMSRDE, KANPUR

Sir,

BRIEF FACTS OF THE COMPLAINT

  1. Defence Materials & Stores Research & Development Establishment (DMSRDE), Kanpur is an establishment under Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO), Min. of Defence, DRDO Bhawan, New Delhi.
  2. Purchase Management 2006 is applicable for procurement of store items in DRDO.  Gross irregularities and violation of Purchase Management 2006 was made in procurement of Chemicals in year 2012 when the cases were indented by officers of MMG under threat illegal orders of Head ‘Materials Management Group’ (MMG)& Dr. A K Saxena Director DMSRDE
  3.  Dr. A K Saxena Director is an incompetent, arrogant and corrupt administrator who has violated all the rules and regulations of purchase. In the year 2012 while chairing ‘Head of Divisions’ (HOD) meeting, he directed that all HOD’s shall ensure that all demands of chemicals what-so-ever should be immediately forwarded to Head MMG. Head MMG shall consolidate all the requirements and one order shall be placed to get maximum discount from the suppliers
  4. Accordingly Head MMG circulated a memo requesting for the details of chemicals as per the enclosed format. Now here is where criminal conspiracy starts and instead of placing one consolidated demand, Head MMG & Dr. A K Saxena, Director  & CFA split the orders of various chemicals to the tune of Rs. 2.2 Crores.
  5. Procurement of CHEMICALS

Chemicals worth total estimated cost of Rs.2,19,19,074/-were procured centrally by a single division i.e. Material Management Group on limited tender basis splitting total demand against requirements received from various divisions of lab

  • into 30 cases below Rs.10 lakh(to avoid TPC) during 10 months period(from 12 Oct 2011 to 31 July 2012)
  • these demands were cleared by the same SPC (Store Procurement Committee)  Chairman Darshan Lal Joint Director, and
  • issuing more than 40 supply orders during Apr 2012 to  Dec 2012
  • Point to be noted that only in Month of Oct 2011   22 Demands worth total estimated cost of Rs. 15333034.00 were raised out of which 16 Demands worth total estimated cost of Rs 11471067.00 were cleared in one SPC meeting held on 16th Nov 2011 by SPC (Store Procurement Committee) dealing cases costing less than Rs 10 lakh headedby Chairman Darshan Lal Joint Director. Further it has bypassed the expert higher level SPC (Store Procurement Committee) dealing cases costing more than Rs 10 lakh headed by an honest officer Chairman Dr. DK Setua, Addl. Director having expertise with chemical background who might have not permitted splitting of cases in this manner.
  1. These 30 No. Cases for which at least details up to supply order date(which confirms that supply order is prepared) are mentioned in following tables

Table-1

  • For Sl. 01-03 total estimated cost  is Rs. 2832300.00 and total value of 08 Supply orders is Rs. 2635059.00
  • Point to be noted that
    • These Demand are raised on Limited Tender basis by same indenter officer, on same date 31-Jul-12 ,
    • SPC conducted on 22nd Aug 2012,
    • CFA approval accorded on 05-Sep-12, Tender Enquiry issued on the same date 05-Sep-12, and
    • 08 No Supply orders worth Rs. 2635059.00 are placed on same date 4-Dec-2012.
    • Demands of chemicals vide DMSRDE/13MMG042 & DMSRDE/13MMG041 at Sl.No. 01 and 02 reflect same chemical “Ethylene Di Chloride AR Make: Rankem/SD fine /Qualigens /SRL Each Pack of 2.5 ltr”
    • The requirement of chemicals was split into demands below Rs. 10.0 Lakh to avoid TPC and open tender.
    • DRDO Chemical Rate Contract exists w.e.f. 17th Sep 2012 and placement of these supply orders under the RC would have fetched better quality at discounted prices.
    • Placement of these orders on limited tender to known local vendors ignoring DRDO Chemical RC  clearly exhibit vested interest through manipulation  in prices, quality, pack size etc so as to fetch financial benefits hence indicates financial corruption/ corrupt practices of giving business/ benefits to own firms.chem table1

Table-2

  • For Sl. 04-08 total estimated cost  is Rs. 3422198.00
    • These Demand are raised on Limited Tender basis in December 2011 from 02nd to 31st Dec2011,
    • These Demand are cleared in 05 SPC meetings  conducted over a period of 45 days from  21st Dec 2011 to 02nd Feb 2012
    • CFA approval accorded and Tender Enquiry issued over a period of 45 days from  26th Dec 2011 to 14th Feb 2012, and
    • Supply orders prepared over a month period from 17th Apr 2012 to 22nd May 2012.
  • Point to be noted that
  • The requirement of chemicals was split into demands below Rs. 10.0 Lakh to avoid TPC and open tender which would have fetched better quality at discounted prices. Further it has bypassed the expert higher level SPC (Store Procurement Committee) dealing cases costing more than Rs 10 lakh.

Placement of these orders on limited tender to known local vendors clearly exhibit vested interest through manipulation  in prices, quality, pack size etc so as to fetch financial benefits hence indicates financial corruption/ corrupt practices of giving business/ benefits to own firms.chem table2

Table-3

  • For Sl. 09-17 total estimated cost  is Rs. 6272502.00
    • From Sl No.09-15 Demand worth total estimated cost   Rs. 51.00 lakh are raised on Limited Tender basis on 31st Oct 2011  and Sl No 16,17 on 24,25th Oct 2011
    • These Demand are cleared in one  SPC meeting  conducted on   16th Nov 2011
    • CFA approval accorded and Tender Enquiry issued over a period of 15 days from  8th Dec 2011 to 21st Dec 2011, and
    • Supply orders prepared over six months period from  14th Jan 2012 to 22nd Jun 2012 (i.e. there appears no urgency).
  • Point to be noted that
  • The requirement of chemicals was split into demands below Rs. 10.0 Lakh to avoid TPC and open tender which would have fetched better quality at discounted prices. Further it has bypassed the expert higher level SPC (Store Procurement Committee) dealing cases costing more than Rs. 10 lakh headed by an honest officer Chairman Dr. DK Setua. Addl. Director having expertise with chemical background who might have not permitted splitting of cases in this manner.
  • Placement of these orders on limited tender to known local vendors clearly exhibit vested interest through manipulation  in prices, quality, pack size etc so as to fetch financial benefits hence indicates financial corruption/ corrupt practices of giving business/ benefits to own firms.chem table3

Table-4

  • For Sl. 18-30 total estimated cost  is Rs. 9060532.00
    • From Sl No.09-15 Demand are raised on Limited Tender basis over a period of 10 days from12th Oct 2011  to  21st Oct 2011
    • Out of these Demand most are cleared in one SPC meeting conducted on   16th Nov 2011 and only four demands were cleared in SPC meetings held on 8th Dec 2011 (01),  06th Jan 2012 (02 ) and 02nd Feb 2012 (01).
    • CFA approval accorded and Tender Enquiry issued over a period of 45 days from  29th Nov 2011 to 14th Feb 2012, and
    • Supply orders prepared over two and half months periodfrom  18th May 2012 to 30th  July2012.
  • Point to be noted that
    • The requirement of chemicals was split into demands below Rs. 10.0 Lakh to avoid TPC and open tender which would have fetched better quality at discounted prices. Further it has bypassed the expert higher level SPC (Store Procurement Committee) dealing cases costing more than Rs 10 lakh headed by an honest officer Chairman Dr. DK Setua, Addl. Director having expertise with chemical background who might have not permitted splitting of cases in this manner.
    • Placement of these orders on limited tender to known local vendors clearly exhibit vested interest through manipulation  in prices, quality, pack size etc so as to fetch financial benefits hence indicates financial corruption/ corrupt practices of giving business/ benefits to own firms.chem table4

From the facts stated above, it is amply crystal clear that prima facie material regarding Abuse of Authority by arrogant and corrupt administrator Dr. A K Saxena, Director DMSRDE exists.

    • That he entered into criminal conspiracy with Mr. Darshan Lal, Joint Director, Chairman SPC and Head MMG with an intention to cheat DRDO and exchequer’s money.
    • In pursuance of the said criminal conspiracy,  Dr. A K Saxena, Director and Mr. A K Singh, Technical Staff Officer of Director DMSRDE are tampering with evidence / documents that shall be prejudice to fair trial, investigation, trial or any inquiry.

In view of the above mentioned facts and evidences it is earnestly requested that an order for through investigation of all procurement done by Dr A K Saxena after assuming charge as Director, DMSRDE, DRDO, Kanpur to stop further corruption and wastage of poor tax payers money.

 

Date: 07th January 2014

 

Prabhu Dandriyal                                                                                                                             
21-Sunderwal, Raipur, Dehradun -248008                                                                              
0135-2787750 – 91-9411114879                                                                 
prabhudoon@gmail.com,  www.corruptionindrdo.com

 

Annexure -1 – ION DATED 12.12.2012 ISSUED BY MR. AMIT SARAIYA, HEAD MMG chem ion

Uncategorized

SATYAMEV JAYATE Jai Ho Jai Ho Jai Ho

3 Comments

 

To                                                                                        20th December 2013
Honorable Defence Minister
Room No – 104, South Block
New Delhi-110011

SATYAMEV JAYATE    Jai Ho      Jai  Ho        Jai Ho

Honorable defence Minister of India on 29th October 2013 ordered CBI inquiry against the corrupt top DRDO officials.

“Also ordered and recommended replacement of Recruitment & Assessment Centre ( RAC) by suitable agency like UPSC”

I congratulate all the honest and innocent workforce of DRDO, who did noticed the misadventures of DRDO Hqrs & Directors of lab and informed the Honorable Defence Minister/ Honorable President of India through registered complaints. These corrupt officials used to write their own constitutions such that they can misinterpret the government laid down rules and misappropriate the government funds for their own benefits, under the shadow of secrecy and OSA 1923, and they swallowed their ugly acts.

God gave me courage to fight against the corrupt officials of DRDO. I have begun this journey just after “KARGIL WAR”. DRDO did consumed thousand & thousand crores, did not delivered any significant product which can utilize in “KARGIL WAR” and then General Malik uttered “casualties in the conflict could have been reduced had the Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) “not come in the way”

“It has taken fifteen years to convince the government of India about involvement of DRDO officials/ Directors in neck deep corruption.”

On 28th October 2013 Defence Secretary Sh R K Mathur put up note to Defence Minister with proof of involvement in recruitment of scientists unfairly with manipulation and hiding facts while investigation, trying to close three times the investigation with wrong feedbacks by following top DRDO officials.

Four Recruitment  Cases of  Mrs T Chandrabanu, Scientist ‘F’, Mrs S Geetha, Scientist ‘C’, Ms Swati Srivastva,  Scientist ‘C’   Ms Dolly Bansal, Scientist ‘C’  

  1. Civilian Padma Awardee 2003, Former Scientific Advisor to Defence Minister, DG-DRDO 2004-2008
  2. Civilian Padma Awardee 1998 & 2013, Former Scientific Advisor to Defence Minister, DG-DRDO 2008-May 2013, Chairman of The Aeronautical Society of India Hyderabad Branch,  President, C.R.Rao Advanced Institute of Mathematics, Statistics and Computer Science (AIMSCS)
  3. Former Distinguished Scientist & Chief Controller – R&D (LS & IC),DRDO , President – Amity Science, Technology and Innovation Foundation, DRDO Technology Leadership Awardee (2010), Scientists of the year Awardee 1989, President – Federation of Indian Physiological Societies Father of Ms S Geetha
  4. The then Distinguished  Scientist, CC R&D (NS M & HR)
  5.  Ex- Director of Personal, Scientist ’H’, Outstanding Scientist, Suspended just two hours before retirement from service. Scientists of the year Awardee 2007, Father of Ms Swati Srivastav
  6.  Ex-Director, DTRL, DRDO retired in May 2013, Best Techno Managerial Services/Popular Science Communication Award 2011
  7.  Ex- Additional Director, RAC, DRDO, Father of Ms Dolly Bansal
  8. Ex- Director of Personal, Scientist ‘G’ Scientist of the Year Award – 2003, Ex-Director, Dte of Life Sciences, DRDO HQrs (2002) DRDO, the recipient of Vijnana Rathna jointly awarded by National Centre for Science & Technology Communication, New Delhi and Science Centre, Gwalior in 1991
  9. Ex-Director, DIPAS, DRDO (appointed Director(DIPAS), Delhi, wef 26 April 2002) winner of HH Loescheke Research Prize in Techniques/ Instrumentation- 2002, Maj Gen SL Bhatia Oration Awardee 2006,HH Loescheke Research Prize in Techniques/ Instrumentation- 2002
  10. the then Director, RAC, DRDO 2004, Ex Director, PEACE , 10 May 2001-15 July 2003, was awardee the DRDO Technology Award-1995

 A very strong recommendation from Honorable Defence Minister highlights the incompetence of existing Recruitment & Assessment Centre ( RAC). Honorable Defence Minister recommended the replacement of RAc by suitable recruitment agency like UPSC from financial year 2014-15.

CBI inquiry is big blow for DRDO having lakhs crores  infrastructure, having more than 30000 strong scientific / technical work forces, having 52 labs across the country.

Some of the above top ex DRDO officials’ calls on to Honorable Defence Minister to convince their innocence during last to last week and expressed that CBI inquiry may stop further research work in DRDO. Honorable Defence Minister very well knew that in the last 30-40 years of their scientific carrier what are their ground contribution because DRDO measurably failed to deliver any significant product in our last “KARGIL WAR”. They forgot that before them or after them whatever DRDO achieved or achieving that is because of honest people work force not by their corrupt / nepotism /incompetent group.

DRDO directors demonstrated their incompetency several times but they manage major share in defence budget every year. They do not deserve single penny until unless they are able to develop an import substitute.

With fake degree’s the manpower were selected as charge-man/ technical assistant and become scientist’H’ outstanding scientist, distinguished scientists by purchasing degree from private institutions, deemed universities and also manipulating by DIAT itself, crores of crores rupees were distributed by DRDO every years in the name of scientific development but now by CGDA audit also revealed that this money is routing through private institutes and deemed universities. It also confirmed facts that if any one check DRDO’s M Tech/PhD’s/ honorable degrees then will found that the money connection and degrees allotments like reveri’s by private universities and deemed universities etc. And unfortunately this mechanism also starts following in government intuitions in the name of resource development.

The incompetence of DRDO directors have been observed and felt by services Hqrs. Since inception of DRDO till 1990, DRDO used to work very closely on General staff requirement and Generals were closely monitoring day to day developments of DRDO. But when DRDO started “working on major programs” without prior knowledge of basic science &technology gave assured commitment for product development which never saw the light of the day.

The time has come for sincere and honest efforts by scientific community for an end result/ product development.

Honorable Defence Minister is requested to thoroughly investigate the DRDO procurement policy which has made the scientist a mere suppliers. Every director of 52 Labs has fake companies or associations with suppliers. Investigation will reveal that incompetent suppliers who are in touch with DRDO director beside his knowledge base, if he is rice exporter/ simple computer peripheral sellers /simple traders, he can sell any high-tech missile parts/ high tech laser components / high end software’s or anything which required by DRDO scientists in national interest or strategic applications. Dilemma these high tech information is shared by these incompetent suppliers with their families in kitchen and dining table. This is only for money matter nothing else no national interest, no values, no moral. In last 10 years honorable defence minister and national security adviser also received n numbers of anonymous letter but having truth and IB also gave confirmation reports.

Sir, how can you imagine wonders from this mind set the lab directors of DRDO ?  Absolute power, Absolute corruption.

Government of India, Ministry of Defence should reconsider the appointment of Scientific Adviser to RM as it was done through search committee before 1984. A person with a moral values /strong scientific knowledge base known across the globe/ technical leadership/ technology contributions like  Dr. Daulat Singh Kothari,  Prof. Suri Bhagavantham, Dr. Basanti Dulal Nagchaudhur I, Dr. Raja Rammana, etc.

The selection of Scientific Adviser in house the incompetent manpower has damaged the scientific temperament. The current environment / work culture there are no special or outside observation encouragement for innovation, creativity, scientific achievements, etc, only incompetent/ yes man/ are encouraged. Today in DRDO no transparency in recruitments / promotions /procurements is observed, every lab facing nepotism/ yes man culture.

Sir, I want to congratulate you for taking such strong decision and giving signal to all corrupt official of DRDO, in spite of big lobbyist ex – DG, SA to RM who have good connection in PMO.

The decision is timely, well awaited Lokpal has passed honorably from both the houses and Lokpal recommends appropriate punishment for corrupt officials, “They will get their due”

Jai Hind

Drdo

CORRUPTION IN PROCUREMENT OF ANTIVIRUS – DMSRDE

3 Comments
 
To                                                                                                            17th December 2013
Central Vigilance Commissioner
Central Vigilance Commission
Satarkta Bhawan, A- Block, GPO Complex, INA
New Delhi-110023

SUBJECT : CORRUPTION IN PROCUREMENT OF ANTIVIRUS

COMPLAINT AGAINST :  Mr. SARVESH KUMAR, SCIENTIST ‘F’ and  Dr. ARVIND KUMAR SAXENA, DIRECTOR, DMSRDE, KANPUR

Sir,

BRIEF FACTS OF THE COMPLAINT 

  1. Defence Materials & Stores Research & Development Establishment (DMSRDE), Kanpur is an establishment under Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO), Min. of Defence, DRDO Bhawan, New Delhi.
  2. Purchase Management 2006 is applicable for procurement of store items in DRDO.  Gross irregularities and violation of Purchase Management 2006 was made in procurement of Antivirus Software in year 2013 when the cases were indented by Mr. Sarvesh Kumar, Scientist ‘F’. The major irregularities and violations of purchase rules are given below.

i.        Method/Mode of Procurement: Method of procurement in all the three cases of Quick Heal Antivirus was Local Board. When there was a consolidated demand of 372 Antivirus and total cost of the case was around Rs. 270000.00 then case should be raised under Limited Tender as per Rule 7.6 of PM 2006. Vide letter No. DMM/II/PP/0000207/M/3041/D(R&D) dated 15th Oct 2007 Corrigendum No. -2 Directors of Establishments are empowered to constitute Local Purchase Committee for purchase up to cost of Rs. 1.0 Lakh on urgent requirements by amending Rule 6(d) of PM 2006. Copy of the letter is enclosed as Annexure-7. The same rule is quoted here for ready reference.

Purchase of goods by purchase committee: Purchase of goods costing above Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) only and up to Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh) only on each occasion may be made on the recommendations of a duly constituted Local Purchase Committee consisting of three members of an appropriate level as decided by the Director of Lab/Estt. The committee will survey the market to ascertain the reasonableness of rate, quality and specifications and

Identify the appropriate supplier. Before recommending placement of the purchase order, the members of the committee will jointly record a certificate as under. CFA will ensure that splitting of demands is avoided.

ii.        Splitting of consolidated demand of Antivirus in three parts: Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena split the consolidated the demand in three parts and misused his official position & powers so that case could not go under Limited Tender. In all cases of three local boards supply order was placed to the same vendor. This establishes vested interests of Dr. Saxena and Mr. Sarvesh Kumar using Local Board for purchase of Antivirus instead of Limited Tender. This leads loss to public fund and Corruption of Rs. 37920.00 by Mr. Sarvesh Kumar.

iii.        As per provisions of Purchase Management 2006 Rule 5.1.1(b) –Purchase orders will not be split-up to avoid the necessity for obtaining sanction of the higher authorities. Copy of the rule is enclosed as Annexure-8. Sprit of Purchase Rules and CVC Guidelines is that “The proposals shall not be split merely to bring them within the delegated powers”.

iv.           Local Board did not make market survey to ascertain the reasonableness of rate, quality and specifications and identify the appropriate supplier, rather one vendor M/s P. S. Computronics pre-fixed by Dr. Saxena was allowed to submit three quotations to Sarvesh Kumar and board members were forced to sign the certificates and other purchase related papers. Hence purchase procedure according to Purchase Management 2006 was not followed and grossly violated in this case.

3.           Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director, DMSRDE, Kanpur and Mr. Sarvesh Kumar, Scientist ‘F’ are posted in DMSRDE, Kanpur. Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena is Director, DMSRDE with effect from 01 January 2011.

4.           Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director, DMSRDE dissolved Information Technology Division on 02 Dec 2013 and constituted a new division “Computer Science Division” under headship of Mr. Sarvesh Kumar, Scientist ‘F’.

5.            Procurement and installation of Antivirus in all computers available in DMSRDE was one of the charters of Information Technology Division. Every year this division was purchasing about 300 units of Antivirus Licenses for security of PCs. These Antiviruses are having life time of one year from date of installation.

6.            In the year 2011, a demand was initiated for procurement of Antivirus Licenses with following details. Copy of the demand is enclosed as Annexure-1.table1

7.             300 units of Quick Heal Total Security Antivirus were purchased in the year 2012 on the basis of demand mentioned above. Details of procurement are given below. Copies of Supply Orders issued on 14 Nov 2011 are enclosed as Annexure-2.

table2

8.           Unit price details of Quick Heal Antivirus purchased in year 2012 are given below.table3

9.            During the period his posting at Information Technology Division, DMSRDE, Kanpur from 01.01. 2011 to 02.12.2013, Mr. Sarvesh Kumar, Scientist ‘F’ made following procurements as indenter on orders of Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director. Copies of the demands initiated by Sarvesh Kumar are enclosed as Annexure-3LIST OF CASES INDENTED AND ITEMS PROCURDED BY MR. SARVESH KUMAR, SCIENTIST ‘F’

table4 Demand status of cases initiated by  Mr. Sarvesh Kumar is enclosed as Annexure-4.

10.            In Information Technology Division, DMSRDE, Kanpur three Scientist Mr. R.P. Bhat, Scientist ‘F’, Mr. Sarvesh Kumar, Scientist ‘F’ and Mr. N.P. Gupta, Scientist ‘C’ were posted from 19 Feb 2012- 02 Dec 2013. Mr. R.P. Bhat, Scientist ‘F’ was Head of Information Technology Division.

11.              IT Division sought Proposal for Antivirus for procurement of Quickheal Total Security Antivirus from M/s Well Known Computers Pvt Ltd, Kanpur in the year 2013 on 14.01.2013. Copy of the proposal dated 14.01.2013 is enclosed as Annexure-5. The details of the proposal Well Known Computers are as under.

table5

12.            In the year 2013, for procurement of Quick Heal Total Security Antivirus (300 Units) a Statement of Case was put-up to Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director, DMSRDE for procurement of Antivirus under Limited Tender through Head IT Division but Dr. Saxena turned down the case and constituted a Local Board for procurement of Antivirus.  This Local Board was constituted of Mr. Sarvesh Kumar, Scientist ‘E’ (now Scientist ‘F’) Chairman, Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Scientist ‘D’ and Mr. N.P. Gupta, Scientist ‘C’.

13.             On direction of Dr. Saxena, Mr. Sarvesh Kumar split the demand of Antivirus licenses in three parts and gets financial sanction from Dr. Saxena, Director in three cases under Local Board. Total consolidated demands of 372 Antivirus licenses were split in three parts so that cases remain under financial powers (Rs. 1.0 lakh) of the Director and procurement could be made under Local Board. Details of procurement of Quick Heal Total Security Antiviruses in the year 2013 by Mr. Sarvesh Kumar, Scientist ‘F’ are given below.table6

These Quickheal Antivirus packs were received by Mr. Sarvesh Kumar on 11 Apr 2013 vide Receipt & Inspection Note (RIN) No. 14LP0009 and 14LP0010 dated 11 April 2013. Copies of the receipts are enclosed as Annexure-6.

14.        Unit price details of Quick Heal Antivirus purchased in year 2013 by Mr. Sarvesh Kumar are given below.table7

15.         It is very clear from the observation of the Purchase Proposal of Well Known Computers and procurements made by Mr. Sarvesh Kumar that the rates of Quickheal Antivirus are higher in later case. This lead loss to Government fund due to corrupt practices adopted by Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena and Mr. Sarvesh Kumar. Comparative details of both cases are given below.

Comparative rates of Well Known Computers (Proposal) and P.S. Computronics (Sarvesh)table8

Loss to public fund on purchase of Antivirus by Sarvesh Kumar on split of consolidated demand by Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena, Director, DMSRDEtable9

16.      Before placing the order the IT division can see these online offers which are less then quoted price and negotiate for best price from vendors in the interest of organization. Even that the for bulk there paper license offers are available.
17.       Therefore purchases made by Dr. Arvind Kumar Saxena and Mr. Sarvesh Kumar by split of consolidated demand of Antivirus lead loss to public fund by Rs. 37920.00 and in turn make a scope of Corruption.

VIOLATION OF DIRECTOR’S POWER AND CONDUCT RULES

i.     Misuse of power & position for personal gain
ii.    Violation of Rule 3(1) and 3(2)(i) and 3(1)(iii) of CCS(Conducts) Rules 1964                   iii.    Splitting of demands of Antivirus in three parts and Constitution of Local Board instead of Limited Tender for purchase of Antivirus                                                                   iv.   Sanctioning of three cases of purchases each just below Rs. 1.0 Lakh of his financial powers

AS HEAD “Computer Science Division” MR. SARVESH KUMAR, SCIENTIST ‘F’ VIOLATED THE DRDO PROCUREMENT RULES

i.       Did not follow the purchase procedure of Local Purchase Committee. Didnot make any market survey instead collected three quotations by hand from representative of M/s P. S. Computronics, Kanpur and forced to sign on the papers to other two members of the board.
ii.       Gross violation of conduct under Rule 3.(1) of CCS(Conducts) Rules 1964

Therefore, in light of the above mentioned facts and evidences, may kindly investigate the matter. This may be the “tip of iceberg”. Further investigation may reveal violations of procurement for personal gain in the tune of corers of rupees.

The classic example from DMSRDE, Kanpur is the violation of procurement rules for the purchase of   “High Temp. Reaction Overhead System” 28,50,000 &   “50 Ltrs. High Temp. Monel Reactor” 38,50,000. This split case example of where Director’s power is limited up to 50 lakh with a Hqrs rep. because without splited the system cost was Rs 62.5 lakh. The details will be followed.

Similar misadventure was committed several times in the name of technology development by Ex, DG, DRDO Dr V K Saraswat, where financial power was limited up to 50 corers  and CAG in its special audit noticed violation of splitting the procurement cases while CCPA approved for Rs 150 corers.

Regards

 Prabhu Dandriyal
21-Sunderwal, Raipur, Dehradun -248008
0135-2787750 – 91-9411114879 
prabhudoon@gmail.com, www.corruptionindrdo.com
table10
 
Uncategorized

High Court restrains PTU admissions in distance courses

1 Comment

The Punjab Technical University (PTU) has been restrained by the Delhi High Court from admitting students in its distance education programme courses till IGNOU accords approval on the issue for the current academic year.

A bench of Chief Justice D Murugesan and Justice V K Jain told ”We direct the second respondent university not to admit any student pursuant to the advertisement made on December 3, 2012 without specific approval from respondent No. 6 Distance Education Council of IGNOU.”

The court’s order came on a petition filed by one Tilak Singh, a resident of Delhi, alleging that the University was inviting applications despite the fact that it’s plea for extension for running the distance education programme courses was pending with IGNOU.

“Vide communication dated October 12, 2012, the Distance Education Council (of IGNOU) has also directed the Punjab Technical University not to admit any student till the application for extension/approval of recognition is pending.

“In spite of the above communication, it appears that the University in question has published advertisement…Calling for applications of the students. Now, in our opinion, in the absence of of any recognition or approval, the University cannot make any admission and that too when the it has been specifically told by the Council concerned that the students should not be admitted,” the court said.

The court has asked the PTU and others to file their responses to the petition and fixed the matter for hearing on March 11.

During the hearing, the counsel for Singh said the PTU was playing with the career of lakhs of students and have duped them to the tune of crores of rupees