Tag Archives: year

Drdo

Nearly 700 scientists quit DRDO in six years, says Govt

5 Comments

NEW DELHI, December 5, 2012 – THE HINDU

Scientists install a DRDO-developed bio-toilet in the icy vastness of Siachen. File photo: DRDO

Nearly 700 scientists have resigned from India’s premier military research body DRDO in little less than six years from 2007, Defence Minister A K Antony said on Wednesday.

In a written reply to a question in the Rajya Sabha on resignation of scientists from Defence Research and Development Organisation(DRDO), Mr. Antony said a total of 637 scientists resigned during 2007-2011 and 50 scientists up to October 31 this year.

Scientists who had resigned have either cited personal or domestic reasons for leaving DRDO, Mr. Antony said.

However, it is assumed that increased opportunities or incentives available in other organisations and industries are the main reason of such resignation, he added.

On incentives taken as corrective measures to restrict resignation of scientists from DRDO, Mr. Antony said excellent infrastructure facilities have been created at work places and residential complexes and two additional increments have been given on promotion to each grade.

To another question, Mr. Antony said DRDO is a subordinate organisation under Defence Ministry and does not enjoy any special powers or autonomy because of its strategic nature of work.

Asked whether DRDO enjoys a huge amount of autonomy because of its strategic nature of work, he said, “DRDO is a subordinate organisation under the Department of Defence( R&D) in Defence Ministry and is governed by central government rules and regulations.

“Therefore, DRDO as an organisation does not enjoy any special powers or autonomy because of its strategic nature of work.”

Revised delegation of financial powers of Director General of DRDO was carried out in 2010 to address a long standing requirement and was done after due process and deliberation, he said.

“The process of exercise of these powers has been further rationalised and a corrigendum has been issued by Department of Defence (R&D) on November 21, 2012 as a partial modification to the earlier financial powers,” the minister added.

____________________________________________________________

Question and Answer in  RAJYA SABHA

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF DEFENCE
RAJYA SABHA

QUESTION NO 1295
ANSWERED ON 05.12.2012

Resignation of scientists from DRDO

1295 SHRI DILIPBHAI PANDYA

Will the Minister of DEFENCE be pleased to satate :-

(a) whether it is a fact that about 650 scientists have resigned from their posts in Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) during the last five years;

(b) if so, the year-wise and post-wise details thereof;

(c) whether low emoluments in DRDO are the reasons for their resignation; and

(d) if so, what corrective steps are taken / proposed to be taken by Government to persuade the scientists not to resign?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF DEFENCE
(SHRI A.K. ANTONY)

(a) A total of 637 scientists have resigned during 2007-2011 and 50 scientists upto 31st October 2012.

(b) Year-wise and post-wise details are given below:-

Post Year
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
(as on 31st October 2012)
Scientist ‘B’ 166 78 41 38 58 35
Scientist ‘C’ 86 58 18 18 21 12
Scientist ‘D’ 13 8 2 2 5 3
Scientist ‘E’ 2 5 1 3 1 –
Scientist ‘F’ 6 1 3 2 1 –
Total 273 150 65 63 86 50

No Scientist ‘G’, Scientists ‘H’ and Distinguished Scientist have resigned during 2007-2012.

(c) Scientists who had resigned have indicated their personal / domestic grounds as the reasons for leaving DRDO. However, it is assumed that increased opportunities / incentives available in other organizations / industries is the main reason of such resignation.

(d) The following incentives have been granted as corrective measures to restrict resignation of scientists from DRDO:-

• Two additional increments on promotion to each Grade.
• Up to six variable increments on promotion granted on fast track.
• Professional update allowance to all scientists.
• Fast track promotions through assessments.
•Opportunity to acquire higher qualifications at reputed institutes viz. IIT’s / IISc, etc. as DRDO sponsored candidate.
•Young Scientists, Scientist of the Year and other DRDO Awards in recognition to their contributions, etc.
• Excellent infrastructure facilities have been created at work places and residential complexes.

Government is making all efforts to grant Performance Related Incentive Scheme (PRIS) to DRDO scientists at par with scientists of Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) and Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO).

 

Drdo

DRDO disowns chief controller, says he is retired

5 Comments

DRDO claims Dr Pillai has retired even though its website shows otherwise

ABHINANDAN MISHRA New Delhi | 17th Nov 2012               Sunday Guardian

The Defence Research Development Organisation (DRDO) has refused to acknowledge that Dr Sivathanu Pillai is the chief controller of research and development in the organisation, despite the fact that Pillai is still very much a part of DRDO. Pillai’s post is regarded as the second most senior defense scientist post in the country, just after the position of Scientific Adviser to the Defense Minister.

Dr Sivathanu Pillai

His name also does not feature on the list of senior scientists who are presently serving on an extension with DRDO. Pillai, who is also the Chief Executive Officer of Brahmos Aerospace, was granted his third post retirement extension last year.

When contacted, Ravi Gupta, the spokesperson of DRDO said that Pillai’s name is not on the list of senior scientists who have got extension because he has retired from DRDO after getting two extensions as no further extension is possible beyond the age of 64.

However, the DRDO telephone directory of 2012 mentions Pillai’s name and carries his designation as CC of R&D in DRDO on page number 4 and his Delhi number has been listed there. Similarly, the invitation card of National Institute of Technology, Kozhikode, that was held last month, where Dr Pillai was the chief guest, mentions his designation as CC, R&D in DRDO.

Gupta also added that Pillai’s name will be removed from DRDO’s website. However, even after three weeks of this correspondent speaking to Gupta, DRDO’s website still shows Pillai as the CC of R&D.

This mysterious disappearance of the name from the seniority list and the fact that DRDO is denying that Pillai is still a part of DRDO has raised questions about why the government is not “acknowledging” that a third extension has been given to Pillai.

Third extensions are given very rarely, if at all. This was acknowledged by Gupta too, who said that third extension beyond the age of 64 is not possible. Pillai was given his first extension in 2007 by Defence Minister A.K. Antony.

Drdo

CIC Decision on DRDO Corruption & Nepotism – 2

Leave a comment

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 308, B-Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066

File No.CIC/LS/A/2012/001209

Appellant Shri Rajiv Chauhan
Public Authority DRDO
Date of hearing 09.08.2012
Date of decision 09.08.2012

Facts :-
1. Heard today dated 09.08.2012. Appellant present. DRDO is represented by Shri
Deepak Mishra, Scientist ‘E’.

2. It is the appellant’s contention that Ms. Geeta, daughter of Dr. W. Silvamurthy, former Director, DIPAS, DRDO, New Delhi, was selected as Scientist ‘c’ in 2004. It is his allegation that said Ms. Geeta was not qualified to be selected as Scientist ‘E’ as she did not hold the Ph.D degree at that time. He also alleges that she obtained the Ph.D. Degree from Bharathiar University, Coimbatore, in an irregular manner. In this connection, vide RTI application dated 7.10.2011, the appellant had sought information on 05 paras. This was responded to by the CPIO vide letter dated 2.11.2011 wherein he refused to disclose any information on the ground that DRDO is an exempted organisation.

3. Hence, the present appeal.

4. Shri Mishra submits that he has not received a copy of the appeal memo and, therefore, it is not possible for him to respond to it off-hand. Besides, he also submits that Chairman, RAC, had conducted an inquiry into the matter and in report dated 24.12.2010 had held that the process of recruitment was in order. The Commission cannot comment on the validity of allegations made by the appellant. Even so, in my opinion, the requested information cannot be denied to the appellant only for the reason that DRDO is an exempted organisation. In fact, transparency demands that the records relating to the inquiry conducted by Chairman, RAC, are allowed to be inspected by the appellant or his representative. I order accordingly.

5. This order may be complied with in 04 weeks time.

Sd/-
( M.L. Sharma )
Information Commissioner

Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against
application and payment of the charges, prescribed under the Act, to the CPIO of this
Commission.

( K.L. Das )
Deputy Registrar

Address of parties :-

1. The Scientist ‘F’ & CPIO, DRDO, RTI Cell,
314-A, B-Block, DRDO Bhawan,
New Delhi-110105.

2. Shri Rajiv Chauhan,
1053/3, Shastri Nagar,
Meerut-250005.

The Right to Information Act, 2005

Appeal before the Central Information Commission;

Appeal No. ———————– Dated ————————
As I am aggrieved by decision of Central Public Information Officer and First Appellate

Authority, I hereby file this appeal for your kind decision.
1. Details of appellant:

1.1 Full Name: – RAJIV CHAUHAN

1.2. Full Address: R/O-1053/3, SHASTRI NAGAR, MEERUT (U.P)-250005

1.3 Phone/Cell No.: 09412628314 ; 09258045938 ; 0121-4009512;

4 Email ID: rajivchauhan89@yahoo.co.in

2. Details of Central Public Information Officer (CPIO):

2.1 Name/Designation: Dr.A.K.TYAGI ; SCIENTIST “F’ , CPIO, DRDO HQ;

2.2 Full Address: 314-A, “B’ BLOCK, DRDO BHAWAN, NEW DELHI-110105

2.3 Name of Public Authority: DRDO, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE.

3. Details of First Appellate Authority [FAA]:

3.1 Name/Designation of the FAA: Dr. ARUN KUMAR

3.2 Full Address of FAA: OS & DIRECTOR; DIRECTORATE OF PERSONNEL;

ROOM NO- 217, DRDO BHAWAN, NEW DELHI-110105

4. Dates of RTI application/first appeal:

4.1 To CPIO — 07 OCT 2011

4.2 To FAA: — 02 DEC 2011

5. Particulars of Decisions:

5.1 Reference No & Date of CPIO Decision:-

02 NOV2011; RTI/01/2091/P/2011/0256; CPIO.DRDO HQ; NEW DELHI

5.2 Reference No & Date of FAA’s Decision:-

10 JAN 2012; RTI/02/2091/F/2011/112;

6. Dates of receipt of replies by appellant from:-

6.1 CPIO— 07 NOV2011

6.2 FAA: — 17 JAN 2012

7. Details of information sought:-

Kindly inform to you that Ms. Geeta D/o of Dr W Silavamurthy, Chief Controller of Defense (R&D) o/o DRDO New Delhi was selected Scientist”C’ through RAC(Recruitment and assessment centre of DRDO) Adv.no-64 item no83-scientist-C without completing the required qualification for the post as published in the advertisement as under-
1- That Ms Geeta is M.Sc (Biochemistry) and submitted his Ph.D during the selection,
but she was not awarded the Ph.d degree or nor completed three year research experience
which is must before the selection of scientist-C.

2- She was taken the junior / senior research fellowship for her Ph.D from DIPAS
(defense institute of psychology & allied sciences, new delhi ) where her father was the

director at that time. Her father constituted / approved the screening / selection
committee of JRF (junior research fellowship) and award 8000/- per month during JRF.

It is clear rule of RAC/DRDO to select the scientist ‘C’-

(i)- At least First class Master Degree in science subject, mathematics or psychology or

first class degree in engineering or technology or metallurgy from a recognized university

or equivalent.

(ii)- Three year experience in research or design or development production in the

Required area.

(iii)-Weightage for higher qualification to be equated as research experience for lateral

requirement as under –

Post graduate degree in engineering-two years.

Doctorate degree in Science.-three years.

Doctorate degree in engineering-four years.

NOTE ;- RAC website clarify that the candidate’s Ph.D degree should be awarded up to

the closing date as given in the advertisement for scientist ‘C’post.

Here I want to clear you that Ms. Geetha Ph.D was not awarded till closing date as given

in the advertisement.However Ms.Geetha did not fulfill the minimum eligibility

qualification and experience as published, since after that she was selected with the

criminal conspiracy of her father with board members of the RAC/DRDO. who

dishonestly and cheated all the participants applied for the post and forged the official

documents to select as a scientist.

Ms. Geeta did not obtained his Ph.D then how selection

committee consider this research period as an three year experience ?

Her father constituted / approved the screening / selection committee of JRF (junior

research fellowship) as Director of the DIPAS and awarded 8000/- per month

scholarship and violet the Prevention of the corruption act-1988 – 13(d)- ii.
I here by enclose all related documents to prove the corruption during the selection

as an Interview letter / Ph.D submission detail. Her Ph.D was not awarded till time up to

the application submission date for the scientist-C post as per the RAC rules.

I want the following information’s as under-
S.No INFORMATION SOUGHT REPLY
1. Did Ms.Geetha’s father / Director of DIPAS/ drdo Rr. W.Silvamurthy constituted / approved the screening / selection committee of JRF and awarded @ Rs.8000/- per month during JRF to her daughter?
Yes/No
2. Ph.D degree should be awarded up to the closing date as

given in the advertisement for scientist’C’ post. Or Three

year experience in research or design or development

production in the required area is essential? Yes/No
3. Was Ph.D degree awarded to Ms.Geetha up to the closing date as given in the advertisement for scientist ‘C’ post. Yes/No
4. Have Ms. Geetha completed essential qualification for scientist ‘C’ post at the time up to the closing date as given in the advertisement?
Yes/ No
5. Provide the photocopy of the application form filled by Ms. Geetha for the scientist’C’ post against the advertisement published. Provide the photocopy of required application form filled by Ms. Geetha.

I state that the information sought does not fall within the restriction in section 8 & 9 of the Act and to the best of my knowledge it pertains in the DRDO office contained & record. Above required information is directly related to corruption and not come under scheduled –II. I request to you please provide me the information by the speed post.

8. Brief facts of the case:-

I submitted my RTI application before the CPIO, DRDO, New Delhi on dt.07-10-2011. Cause for put up this application was the allegation of the corruption / misuse of the office during the selection of the scientist. CPIO reply is not satisfactory and not as per the law because the RTI is related with the allegation of the corruption and not exempted under section 24(1) of the RTI Act-2005.
However in this Supreme Court civil Appeal no – 6454,clearly mentioned that- “37. The right to information is a cherished right. Information and right to information are intended to be formidable tools in the hands of responsible citizens to fight corruption and to bring in transparency and accountability. The provisions of RTI Act should be enforced strictly and all efforts should be made to bring to light the necessary information under clause (b) of section 4(1) of the Act which relates to securing transparency and accountability in the working of public authorities and in discouraging corruption.”

I was not satisfied with the reply of CPIO,DRDO HQ, New Delhi, after that I submitted an appeal before FAA to take the information but the FAA of DRDO dismissed the appeal and failed to provide the information with the ref. of second schedule of the RTI Act & section 24(1) of the RTI Act-2005.

9. Reasons/grounds for this appeal:-

1- That the RTI application is related with the public information because many participant were applied for the above mentioned scientist post after the publication of the advertisement in employment news paper .
2- That this information is directly related with the corruption and misuse of the office and not come under section 24(1) of the RTI Act .
3- That the main object to take this information is to provide as an evidence before High Power Investigating Officer/ Commissions / High Courts in the interest of law and justice.

10. Any other information in support of appeal:-

This RTI information is required to proof a corruption during the selection. Secondly, In a RTI reply of the Bharathiar University vide his letter no COE/Ph.D/RTI Act/2011/2173 dt.20/12/11 Ms Geetha Ph.D awarded date clearly showing that , she was not completing minimum eligibility qualification during the submission of the application form for the scientist – C post.[encl]. Thirdly Central Vigilance Commission investigate the case and I wants clear evidence to put up before him through this RTI.
11. Prayer/relief sought for:-
I request your honor to pass an order to concern authority to provide the following information’s as under-
S.No INFORMATION SOUGHT REPLY
1. Did Ms.Geetha’s father / Director of DIPAS/ drdo Rr. W.Silvamurthy constituted / approved the screening / selection committee of JRF and awarded @ Rs.8000/- per month during JRF to her daughter?
Yes/No
2. Ph.D degree should be awarded up to the closing date as

given in the advertisement for scientist’C’ post. Or Three

year experience in research or design or development

production in the required area is essential? Yes/No
3. Was Ph.D degree awarded to Ms.Geetha up to the closing date as given in the advertisement for scientist ‘C’ post. Yes/No
4. Have Ms. Geetha completed essential qualification for scientist ‘C’ post at the time up to the closing date as given in the advertisement?
Yes/ No
5. Provide the photocopy of the application form filled by Ms. Geetha for the scientist’C’ post against the advertisement published. Provide the photocopy of required application form filled by Ms. Geetha.
I state that the information sought does not fall within the restriction in section 8 & 9 of the Act and to the best of my knowledge it pertains in the DRDO office contained & record. Above required information is directly related to corruption and not come under scheduled –II. I request your honor to pass an order to concern authority to provide the information’s by the speed post.
(2)- I request your honor to pass an order in favor of the applicant as deemed fit as an any relief .

Personal Presence at hearing:- — YES
Declaration:-

I hereby state that the information and particulars given above are true to the best of my knowledge and belief. I also declare that this matter is not previously filed with this commission nor is pending with any Court or tribunal or authority.
Place: MEERUT

Date: —————-
Signature of appellant

Drdo

Dr W. Selvamurthy, Chief Controller, R&D (Life Sciences), DRDO Statement without Homework

Leave a comment

 DRDO lab seals suspect’s workstation – Deccan Chronicle -September 1, 2012 By B.R. Srikanth | S.V. Krishna Chaitanya DC Bengaluru/Mysore

Dr W. Selvamurthy, Chief Controller, R&D (Life Sciences), stated that 

“This is the first time in the history of the DRDO that an insider has been arrested for suspected terror links. It came as a shock to the entire organisation. Generally, all top scientists, engineers and other officials of the technical and administrative divisions of the DRDO and offices are monitored by the Central Intelligence Bureau (IB). It’s one of those stray incidents,”

DRDO scientist was faculty member of Tripoli varsity
EXPRESS NEWS SERVICE
Posted: Mon May 05 1997 IST

HYDERABAD, May 4: Defence Research Development Organisation (DRDO) scientist Srinivasulu, who was nabbed by Intelligence Bureau (IB) officials and city police here on Thursday night, was found to be working as a faculty member in the Tripoli University in Libya.

IB officials, acting on a tip off, sought the assistance of city police, who arrested the B-grade defence scientist at the Rajiv Gandhi International airport when he was about to board the Dubai-bound Air-India flight.

According to sources, Srinivasulu neither submitted his resignation nor obtained permission from the DRDO authorities for working in Libya. He obtained a passport without the knowledge of DRDO which is statutory. He left for Libya an year-and-half back and joined as a faculty member in the university at Tripoli.

During interrogation, Srinivasulu reportedly confessed before IB officials that he was taking some secret documents with him and one of his colleagues at Tripoli university, Kumar, was also involved in the spying.

Sources added that Srinivasulu has planned to go to Sharjah by the Dubai-bound Indian Airlines flight and then to Malta Islands in Africa by air. From there he was to catch a ship for Tripoli.

Drdo

DRDO scientist was faculty member of Tripoli varsity

Leave a comment

EXPRESS NEWS SERVICE
Posted: Mon May 05 1997 IST

HYDERABAD, May 4: Defence Research Development Organisation (DRDO) scientist Srinivasulu, who was nabbed by Intelligence Bureau (IB) officials and city police here on Thursday night, was found to be working as a faculty member in the Tripoli University in Libya.

IB officials, acting on a tip off, sought the assistance of city police, who arrested the B-grade defence scientist at the Rajiv Gandhi International airport when he was about to board the Dubai-bound Air-India flight.

According to sources, Srinivasulu neither submitted his resignation nor obtained permission from the DRDO

authorities for working in Libya. He obtained a passport without the knowledge of DRDO which is statutory. He left for Libya an year-and-half back and joined as a faculty member in the university at Tripoli.

During interrogation, Srinivasulu reportedly confessed before IB officials that he was taking some secret documents with him and one of his colleagues at Tripoli university, Kumar, was also involved in the spying.

Sources added that Srinivasulu has planned to go to Sharjah by the Dubai-bound Indian Airlines flight and then to Malta Islands in Africa by air. From there he was to catch a ship for Tripoli.

 

Drdo

CVC probe sought in Navy’s procurement of torpedoes

Leave a comment

Apr 08, 2012 | PTI | New Delhi – The Asian Age

The Navy’s deal for procurement of torpedoes for Scorpene submarines from an Italian company has come in for questioning with a Member of Parliament writing to the Central Vigilance Commission seeking a probe into alleged corruption in the selection.
Jainarayan Prasad Nishad, who had earlier written to Defence Minister A K Antony, has alleged that WASS heavy water torpedo was selected for procurement “without validation of critical parameters at sea for speed and range” as specified in the Request for Proposal (RFP).
The RFP clearly stated that only those vendors who could successfully perform dynamic trials of the offered torpedo would be considered but “this was totally ignored in the case of WASS, Italy and the deal was pushed in favour of WASS, thereby ignoring the technical conditions laid in the RFP, Nishad has said.

Citing “(defence) ministry sources” and articles published in some defence magazines, the JDU MP from Bihar has claimed that in the case of the deal, the Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP) was “manipulated and violated for pecuniary financial gains”.
In his letter to Antony, Nishad has contended that the then DG Acquisition had recommended re-issuance of the RFP as the Defence Procurement Procedure was “not being followed and the RFP was ab-initio defective” but later, the Navy used the “excuse” of urgency to reverse the decision and sent it to the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) for approval to consider WASS “as a resultant single vendor”.
Alleging wrongdoings in the process that dates back to 2007 and 2008, the MP claimed that to ensure the RFP was not cancelled, the Navy had “deliberately cleared” another bidder ATLAS Elektronik of Germany at the TEC (Technical Evaluation Committee) stage and rejected it after trials.
“Creating a single vendor scenario through manipulation to overcome the DPP, which has happened in this case, and selecting an inferior product, could lead to the security of the nation being compromised for pecuniary financial gains,” he warned in the letter to Antony.
On getting no response from Antony, the MP shot off a letter to CVC Pradeep Kumar along with the one written to the Defence Minister in January this year. “This has vigilance angle,” he wrote, requesting probe into the matter “seriously” and take necessary steps to stop any possibility of corruption in the deal.
Earlier, ATLAS Elektronik had also cried foul play and sent letters of complaint to the Defence Ministry.
Meanwhile, reacting to the allegations levelled by Nishad, Navy spokesperson Commander P V S Satish said, “For the moment all I can say is that all acquisitions undertaken by the Indian Navy are done with due care and adherence to laid down procedures”.
“Trials were conducted as per the procedures approved by the DAC and were acceptable to both the vendors (in the contract),” he added. The Navy has plans of procuring around 100 torpedoes for the fleet of its six Scorpene submarines, which are being constructed by the Mazagon Dockyarads Limited (MDL) in partnership with French DCNS.

Drdo

Corruption will not be tolerated: AK Antony

Leave a comment

PTI | Apr 11, 2012, 02.42PM IST

KOCHI: In the backdrop of the recent storm over alleged corruption in defence procurements, defence minister AK Antony today said the country’s interests were paramount and there will be “no cover up and no vendetta”.

“India’s interests are our only concern. We are not against any company or country. But India’s interests are paramount”, he told reporters on the sidelines of a function at the Indian Coast Guard here.

Replying to questions in the light of Army chief General V K Singh’s recent claim about alleged attempts to bribe him to favour a sub-standard contract, he said “Corruption will not be tolerated. Even if there is suspicion, a probe will be ordered”.

“No cover up, no vendetta is our policy,” he said, adding if there is an iota of doubt, it would be looked into.

Antony said efforts were on to make defence procurement more transparent. “When people do not get contracts, there will be criticism and allegations. Some companies do try to influence officials and if it is proved action will be taken”.

He said six companies from Israel, Russia, Germany and Singapore and two from India had recently been blacklisted.

The Defence acquisition council meeting last week had sanctioned Annual projects, five-year projects and Long Term Plan from 2012-27, he said.

On reported differences between the Army and the Defence Ministry, he said, “Both are functioning from the same building. There is no communication gap, no confrontation. I function as a joint family. I am very comfortable. I respect the armed forces, their commitment, their dedication. I am proud of it”.

Antony said there was so much demand for joint exercises with the Indian defence forces that “everyone wants to do (it) … ,”

Drdo

GENERAL V K SINGH’S CRUSADE AGAINST CORRUPTION DESERVES NATIONAL RECOGNITION

Leave a comment

From: Kapoor, Pramod (NSN – IN/Gurgaon) <pramod.kapoor@nsn.com>
Date: Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 9:26 PM
Subject: Fwd: Tatra Scam
To:
The latest media hot spot is the revelations by General V K Singh, Chief of Army Staff, about the bribe offer made to him for signing on the purchase order for Czech made Tatra Vehicles. He informed of the bribe offer to his senior, the defense minister, A K Anthony –a man with a reputation for honesty like his big brother, Man Mohan Singh. Neither V K Singh nor Anthony acted on the matter at that time.

Here is a scoop in the attachment by Arun Agrawal, who has dug information about the case filed against an Indian (origin?) business man in Czech republic for causing loss to the tune of some CzecKč 270 million
to vehicle manufacturer Tatra by under recovering the cost of manufacture of these vehicles and also foregoing the profits. The Indian Businessman is Vice-Chairman of the Czech firm and also the owner of UK company –Vectra- through which the sales to India were routed. Arun Agrawal’s writings in the past have shown that he is to be trusted over what he writes.

SCOOP 

CRIMINAL CASE FILED AGAINST TRUCK SCAMSTER RISHI IN CZECH ONE YEAR BACK

GENERAL V K SINGH’S CRUSADE AGAINST CORRUPTION DESERVES NATIONAL RECOGNITION

REFER www.czechposition.com

It should be clear, by now to every moron who went on defending the government in the tussle between the army chief and the Minister that it was the General who upright and honest. And that he was made to pay the price for his honesty in trying to clean up the system..

 

Fighting corruption in the army is not easy. It means war on three different fronts. The politician who is above you, corrupt colleagues who are with you and the moneybags of the arms mafia..  Fighting your own is very different from fighting the enemy.

And here we had the most comical situation of a honest general working under a honest Minister. It is a rarity. However, the clash of two honest personalities can be very dangerous, more so if one is manipulated by the corrupt.

Relations had not soured between the two, when the General reported the bribing incident to his Minister,. Yet all that the Minister did was beat his forehead ( for lack of a better phrase).. Both admit to the reaction..

The Minister counseled that such people should be kept out and the General did not want to pursue the matter further.

While the General’s reaction in being reluctant to take on  senior colleagues is understandable, the reaction of the Minister is not.

Defence purchase falls within his domain. In the age of internet it was not difficult for anyone  to know that Vectra of U K was not the producer of Tatra trucks but was a middleman. It was also not difficult  to know that Tatra was a Czech company , the original manufacturer. It was also not difficult to know the price at which the trucks were being  sold by Czeck company Tatra and the price paid byIndia..

 

All this information was with the General and that is why he did  not sign on the purchase order and wanted to purchase the trucks directly. He knew thatIndiahad been procuring the trucks at more than twice the price sold by the parent company.

The General had done his homework.. It may be a conjecture but there is reason to believe that he informed the Minster and the reason for keeping out the supplier was over invoicing of over 100% which would have compromised their integrity. It was also the reason for the Minister beating his forehead !

 The scam was not in the bribe offered to the General but in the purchase price of the equipment. Could he or his advisers not understand this simple truth.

 

If a  product was being bought  at twice the price for which it was available in the open market then it does not require a genius to divine that bribes had been paid!  Not only bribes but large bribes have been paid to lots of people because each one knows the quantum of profit being made by the middleman.

However only a small percentage of the bribe  ( which is large in absolute terms- 14 crores in this case) was to be paid to the men in uniform, which the  General refused.

The large chunk of bribe was to be paid to those who were not in uniform. And all these persons were within the jurisdiction of the Minister.

 

Hence the matter was squarely within the domain of the Minister and it was a major omission on his part not to order investigation on defence purchase worth thousands of crores  which were procured for twice the market price.

The scam has been going on for a decade and hence the unity of the political parties demanding the resignation of the General Singh.

Contrast the ignorance of the Minister with the discovery made by the author ( with no resources or staff ) in two hours of net surfing. The following information which is a news report fromCzech republicis most damning.:

Ravinder Kumar Rishi, the chief scamster in the deal, was not only swindling the Indian government but also the Czech government.

A criminal case was filed against him in the country where Tatra trucks were manufactured almost a year back for the supplies made toIndia! .

The article dated 27/4/11 on a Czeck website states:

Tatra faces tunneling and tax evasion allegations

Anonymous plaintiff accuses the major owner and management of Tatra truck maker of tunneling profits and tax evasion

The management and a major shareholder in the iconic Czech truck producer Tatra face a criminal complaint for allegedly failing to ensure proper oversight of assets. The anonymous plaintiff claims that the sale of truck parts at knock-down prices toIndiavia an intermediary British company has damaged the company.

Václav Láska, a former high-ranking police investigator, lawyer and one-time head of the local branch of watchdog Transparency International, has lodged a criminal complaint against the management of Tatra trucks and one of the firm’s major shareholders, Indian businessman Ravinder Kumar Rishi, on behalf of plaintiffs who wish to remain anonymous due to fears of “labor persecution,” the daily Právo reported on Wednesday.

Vectra allegedly profits from Tatra’s loss

Since 2005, Tatra has supplied so-called complete knock-down kits (CKD), containing all the components of haulage  Láska claims that between 2005 and 2010 Tatra lost profits of around Kč 270 milliontrucks to the Indian state-owned firm Beml Limited, which then assembles the vehicles in India. The transactions have been conducted through British-registered intermediary firm Vectra Limited, which, according to the charges, has frequently purchased the CKD kits at below production cost, thus causing losses to the Czech company running into millions of crowns.

“The Tatra company sells kits to the British company Vectra Limited without a profit margin, and even at prices lower than the cost of manufacturing. All margins from this business, i.e. all profits from these transactions, go only to the accounts of the British company,” Láska told Právo. “The fact that the representatives of Tatra allow these transactions clearly contradicts the principles of sound economic governance.”

Láska claims that between 2005 and 2010 Tatra lost around Kč 270 million in potential profit. The calculation is based on a profit margin of 10 percent per kit, which he says the management intentionally forfeited in order to sell the goods to Vectra Limited at a knock-down price. Láska also says that through the transactions the company also avoided paying tens of millions of crowns in tax.

“By transferring the considerable profits to the British company, the Tatra company reduced its income tax payments by tens of millions of crowns,” Láska said.

Alleged misuse of information

Ravinder Kumar Rishi, deputy chairman of Tatra’s supervisory board, is also the owner of Vectra Limited and thus de facto represents both Tatra and Vectra in business negotiations — and the transactions in question. According to Láska, Ravinder Kumar Rishi may have misused information in these business relations.

In 2010, Tatra supplied 600 CKD kits to the Indian company Beml — which assembles the trucks and has large orders with the Indian army — and according to Láska, Tatra has committed to deliver a further 460 kits this year. “If the criminal complaint is deemed to be justified, steps could be taken which will curtail further losses and also stop additional tax evasion,” Láska told Právo

The question to be answered is this:

If a criminal complaint was filed against the company and Ravinder Kumar Rishi by the Czech republic for merely causing a loss of 10% on profits foregone due to under invoicing a year back, then what action did the defence Minister take against Vectra whch as a middleman had supplied trucks at more than 100 %  the amount for which Tatra sold in the open market? This scam was going on for the past ten years.

Rishi cheated Czechs by 10% but the Indians by more than 100% !

I will bet top dollar that the anonymous plaintiff referred to in the article is an Indian source who had no faith in the Indian system to act and therefore chose to go through the head of Transparency International.

Could it be the good General  or a source close to him? Your guess is as good as mine!

It is difficult to believe that the Czech authorities did not correspond with the Indian government within the past one year. They do have an embassy in India! Where are the records of the correspondences?

 

The General was made to pay the price for his anti corruption crusade in the Sukhna land scam and the Adarsh Society scam, including the court marshalling  of  Lt. Gen. Avdesh Prakash, who was Military Secretary under Gen. Deepak Kapoor.

It is time that Mr Anthony realizes his mistake. He is e surrounded by corrupt people who are using his  reputation as a shield.

What is at stake is the loss of faith of the people in honest ministers. Manmohan Singh and then Mr Anthony ! What good is the virtue of honesty? Is there any hope of redemption left for the country?

The General will go in a blaze of glory but the Minister will not.

And for those who are aligned with the arms mafia and ask for the reason as to why the General did not take action on the Tatra scam ? Against whom would he take action? Procurement of defence equipment is not under his charge. Did you expect him to take on the retired generals and ex Chiefs who were paid off for signing the document that he refused to sign ? Would there be any proof? Where would that get him? Would you take on a ex defence Minister or a corrupt Minister in the Cabinet? Was the issue of Bofors pursued by the Army Chief?

A General is not a General if he is not a good tactician. General V K Singh proved to be a master tactician in the manner in which he took on the entire system of corruption in the Army and in the Ministry.

This General showed that he had earned all his stars. The nation could give him one more.

General V K Singh a big salute to you..

Even if you could not win the war against corruption with Anthony as your Minister!

In the end the General proved to the nation that even the most honest politician of our times is not good enough to prevent the huge corruption that infests  defence deals.

 

Drdo

SC asks for a copy of CAG report on NTRO scam

Leave a comment

SC asks for a copy of CAG report on NTRO scam

TNN | Jan 17, 2012, 12.47AM IST

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday asked for a copy of the Comptroller and Auditor General’s report pointing out alleged irregularities in the purchase of intelligence equipment byNational Technical Research Organisation(NTRO), which was set up in 2004 to provide critical data relating to threats to the nation.

Solicitor general R F Nariman assured a bench of Justices H L Dattu and C K Prasad that the government had already initiated action against erring officials on the basis of the CAG report but petitioner V K Mittal’s counsel Jayant Bhushan wondered why the Centre was shy of bringing the alleged irregularities into the open by placing the report in Parliament.

The bench asked Nariman to produce the CAG report on NTRO scam in a sealed cover by March 19. This is the second time within a year that the apex court has asked for a CAG report, the first being on the irregularities in the allotment of 2G spectrum and licences during A Raja’s tenure as telecom minister.

Nariman was belligerent in trashing Mittal’s PIL, not only accusing the latter of attempting to serve a personal interest but also alleging that his correspondence with the authorities revealing top secret projects with their location could help countries inimical to India.

Bhushan countered Nariman by alleging that the government was deliberately keeping the matter under wraps in the name of security to shield the culprits. But the bench said, “It is not a case where the government has put the issue in cold storage but promised that it was being looked into. We will not pass an order but request the SG to produce the CAG report in a sealed cover on March 19.”

Mittal had alleged that a major portion of the Rs 450 crore NTRO scam pertained to purchase of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) from an Israeli firm allegedly at a very high price without the mandatory approval of the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS).

NTRO, which functions under the Prime Minister’s Office, has been entrusted with the task of missile monitoring, satellite and airborne imagery, cyber patrolling and security, cyber offensive operations and communication support systems including cryptology.

It was on the complaint of Mittal, a former joint director in the government of India who had also served in NTRO, that the PMO had ordered a probe into the scam and later, CAG was asked to look into the organisation’s accounts. Nariman alleged that Mittal wanted to head the NTRO and filed the PIL when he did not succeed.

During the last hearing, Bhushan had alleged that Delhi High Court had dismissed Mittal’s writ petition on April 6, 2011 after the Centre filed a probe status report in sealed cover assuring prompt action against the guilty officials. However, no action was taken till date, he claimed.

Mittal’s petition stated that the independent body answerable only to the national security adviser was allotted approximately Rs 8,000 crore since 2005, but there was no accounting of the spending.

Drdo

“Today, 85% of NBC defence inventory held by armed forces has been developed by DRDO, and produced by defence PSUs and around 60 private companies,” said DRDO chief controller Dr W Selvamurthy.

1 Comment

9th January 2012

Good Morning Dr Saraswat Ji

                                                               A very happy new year and I pray to almighty that you get well soon.

I was exclaimed along with the common people of India when Honorable Prime Minister was talking for a fundamental change in scientific development to match the development of science at least equivalent to China.

Our CC R&D Dr W Selvamurthy sang the coras and announced that DRDO has supplied items costing 1200 crores for defence applications.

Sir, nobody can digest and appreciate because DRDO with 28000 strong professional manpower, annual budget of 7000 t0 9000 Crores and with a infrastructure of One Lakh Twenty Thousand  Crores Rupees, only delivers 1200 Crores worth products. What is this R&D. The bank interest for total asset and annual expenditure comes ten thousand crores, please rethink.

DRDO needs total restructuring of charter of duties of individual Labs and the mission mode activities to address the defence requirements and needs.

With the achievement of SATCOM microwave communication link lost the attraction as SATCOM was cheaper than microwave communication network. If DRDO have microwave activity on its charter of duty a sensible effort was needed for transform the microwave activity for other than communication as the developed nations preferred to use microwave from kitchen to battlefield.

Thanking you

Regards

Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun 248008
Phone – 0135-2787750, Mobile 9411114879
E-mail id prabhu@dandriyal.com Website –  www.corruptionindrdo.com/