BEML Chief Claims Innocence like all Politicians

BEML chief Natarajan suspended
New Delhi, Jun 11, 2012, DHNS:
The Defence Ministry has suspended Chairman and Managing Director of Bharat Earth Movers Limited (BEML) V R S Natarajan following a recommendation by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) which is investigating the controversial Tatra military trucks supply deal.
The premier investigation agency, which got the Defence Ministry’s permission to probe the role of Natarajan in the alleged irregularities in procurement and supply of Tatra all terrain vehicles to Army, on Monday requested the government to suspend to ensure a “fair probe” into the case.
Last week, when the agency sought government’s permission to probe allegations against the BEML chief, it had also told the Defence Ministry that the presence of Natarajan as CMD of BEML was adversely affecting its probe, sources in the CBI said.
“The government has put the CMD of BEML V R S Natarajan under suspension following a recommendation by the CBI that he should be kept away from the post to ensure fair investigation. The CBI is currently investigating into various charges against Natarajan,” Defence Ministry spokesperson Sitanshu Kar said here on Monday.
P Dwarkanath, who is a senior most functional Director in the BEML, has been asked to take charge as the CMD of the public sector unit, he added.
Natarajan is being questioned by the CBI for alleged irregularities in procurement and supply of Tatra to Army. It is alleged that the public sector undertaking, under Natarajan, violated the purchase guidelines by placing orders on UK-based intermediary company, Tatra Sipox, not the original equipment manufacturer, based in the Czech Republic.
The CBI sources said that the BEML chief is suspected of diluting the original deal to give undue advantage to Tatra. This is separate from the case in which investigation was initiated by the agency after former Army chief Gen VK Singh alleged he was offered Rs 14 crore as bribe by Lt Gen (retd) Tejinder Singh to clear supply of a tranche of 600 Tatra military trucks from BEML. The agency has already booked the BEML chairman for alleged cheating, criminal conspiracy and corruption in connection with tendering process for hiring a private consultancy firm and carried out searches at several locations including his residence. This case is related to award of contract for the implementation of enterprises resource planning project in the public sector undertaking during 2004-09.
The CBI has come across prima facie materials which allegedly indicated Natarajan’s role in the case and the agency will soon call him for questioning on the basis of the documents and records it has collected so far, according to sources in the agency.
The CBI sleuths have also come across several instances where Natarajan allegedly bypassed the norms and interacted directly with the supplying firms on crucial negotiations without taking into confidence the Defence Ministry, sources said.
They said post-facto approvals were allegedly taken from the Defence Minstry by Natarajan on some crucial issues related to supply of all-terrain vehicles on several occasions, but refused to divulge more details in this connection.
Earlier Natarajan had served a legal notice on former Army chief Gen VK Singh demanding an apology for his alleged defamatory statements against the BEML on the Tatra truck deal issue. This prompted the Defence Ministry to issued a show cause notice to him later on June 6.
BEML chief Natarajan suspended
Comment: It is certain the scamster has a Godfather planted in MHA, PMO and MEA since MOD has suspended him.

AK Antony okayed Ravi Rishi's prosecution

Tatra trucks case: AK Antony okayed Ravi Rishi's prosecution in February
Devesh Kumar, ET Bureau Apr 7, 2012, 05.24AM IST
Tags:Tatra truck|Sonia Gandhi|Ravi Rishi|PIO|Ghulam Nabi Azad|General VK Singh|Defence|Army Chief|AK Antony
NEW DELHI: Defence minister AK Antony had sanctioned prosecution of Ravi Rishi, the London-based PIO who is an accused in the case of alleged irregularities in the purchase of Tatra trucks, a little over four weeks before the Army chief, General VK Singh, went public with his allegation that he had been offered a bribe of 14 crore for clearing "a tranche of 600 sub-standard vehicles".
General Singh, who leveled this allegation in an interview to a leading national daily on March 24, also pointed out that 7,000 of those sub-standard vehicles were already in use in the Army and had been sold over the years at exorbitant prices.
The bribery charge triggered an uproar in Parliament, forcing Antony to order a CBI probe into it. But what he failed to mention that he had already sanctioned the prosecution of Rishi, the owner of Vectra group, on February 21 this year. His action came in response to a letter forwarded to him by Union health minister Ghulam Nabi Azad, who was in charge of Congress' affairs in Karnataka, in October, 2009.
The letter, which was redirected by Antony to defence production secretary on the same day, had travelled a long way. It was written to Congress president Sonia Gandhi in August, 2009, by D Hanumanthappa, president of the Karnataka branch of the All India Federation of SC/ST/Backward Classes and Minority Employees Welfare Association, and highlighted the charge that BEML CMD VRS Natarajan had placed an order worth 6,000 crore for the purchase of Tatra trucks from a British agent and, not from the original equipment manufacturer, which was, he alleged, a violation of procurement guidelines.
On its receipt, Sonia is said to have marked the letter to Azad, who was in charge of the party's affairs in Karnataka. The latter is learnt to have forwarded it to the defence minister. Antony, it now transpires, sent it to the defence production secretary for an internal probe into the bribery charge the day he received it from Azad.
After conducting an inquiry on his own, the defence production secretary, it is learnt, reported to Antony that a case could indeed be made out against Ravi Rishi who, contrary to initial media reports, was not an NRI, but a person of Indian origin (PIO) settled in London.
The case was subsequently referred to CBI, which registered a preliminary enquiry into the allegations. As it was aware of the contours of the case, the probe agency swung into action after it came to know that Rishi was planning to undertake a trip to India to participate in Defexpo India 2012, the country's biggest-ever land, naval and homeland security systems exhibition, which was inaugurated by Antony on March 29.
CBI registered an FIR into the case on March 20 and, two days later, it issued a lookout notice to prevent Rishi from leaving the country. He has already been grilled by the investigating agency at least six times since then.
Tatra trucks case: AK Antony okayed Ravi Rishi's prosecution in February

Where’s the defence industry?

By Shailesh Dobhal , 05/09/2010
The Indian automobile industry is the seventh largest, and the second fastest growing in the world after China. Its auto components manufacturers are globally competitive, and every manner of automaker is already here or is in the process of setting up a base here.

Even till early 1980s, the country was an auto backwater, with just about a handful of manufacturers. The industry maturing followed, in a manner of speaking, the market. With domestic demand for anything from two-wheelers and cars to light and heavy commercial vehicles exploding in the last two decades, India has emerged as the global small car hub, and a big exporter of both finished cars and components.

In the last six years, while production doubled, from 7 million to 14 million, exports more than tripled, 0.5 million to 1.8 million last fiscal.

A big consumer market for cellphones made the world's biggest cellphone maker Nokia set up its largest manufacturing plant here, to meet the domestic requirements as well as to build an export base. The story of a big and growing domestic market spawning a vibrant domestic industry repeats itself with consistency across sectors -- apparels, consumer expendables, packaged food, pharmaceuticals, etc.

In fact, it is difficult to think of any industry sector where a huge domestic market is not a prelude to a vibrant domestic industry. Perhaps, only in God-gifted natural resources like oil, gas and minerals can a country be a big consumer and a big importer at the same time. Can there be any other such exceptions?

Well yes, if you consider the country's experience with defence equipment like submarines, ships, fighter planes and artillery guns. India is one the world's biggest consumer of defence equipment, having spent $50 billion in the last 10 years and estimates of over $100 billion in the next decade or so.

And historically we have relied on imports to fulfil over two-thirds of this requirement, as the public sector monopoly of DRDO, 8 PSUs and 39 ordnance factories have failed us squarely. Our defence exports are pathetic, even compared to other big arms importers like South Korea and Singapore. For every dollar worth of export of defence equipment, India imports $200 worth, compared to $20 for Singapore and under $9 for Korea.

Even after almost a decade of opening up of private participation and 26% foreign investment, just about 130 companies have entered the fray, and very little foreign funds have flowed in. Now the defence industry is a sensitive, highly technological one, with governments and graft never far from the scene. And you can't exactly extend the arguments of the plebeian cars and cellphones industry to as highly geo-strategic sector as defence, goes one argument.

Well, maybe not, but the logic of the market is finally inexplicable -- one who pays the piper calls the tune. True, existing big boys of the global arms club will hold back the change, and foreign governments will withhold cutting-edge technologies and newer versions for itself. But purchasing power has to be leveraged to change the old order, and a beginning has to be made somewhere.

Consider what China is doing. The authors of a paper, Leveraging Defence Offset Policy for Technology Acquisition, in the Journal of Defence Studies, January 2009, argue that China is launching its large civilian aircraft industry on an aggressive leverage of transfer of production technology from other countries in the form of outsourcing and offsets, primarily from the US and other aerospace companies.

So why can't India? The reasons are not hard to find. Our much touted defence procurement policy, which inter alia provides for an offset policy, is somewhat unclear in its objectives. The 4-year-old 'Offset Policy' requires a foreign arms vendor winning a contract of more than Rs 300 crore to offset a minimum 30% of this value in the domestic market through purchase of products/services from Indian companies or investments in setting up a joint venture with an Indian partner.

Already, in the absence of a robust monitoring mechanism, some experts have started flagging offsets as the country's next big scam in the making, with unscrupulous foreign vendors using it as a means for kickbacks.

Best practices in offset management can be gleaned from countries like Israel and South Korea that have used it to kickstart their domestic industries. Israel's offset policy explicitly emphasises acquisition of technology and not the product, for that alone can have a technology spillover effect that can spawn related ancillary industries, the backbone for all big manufacturing successes.

Ditto South Korea, where the approval of the offset contract is subject to the foreign arms vendor assuring 'approval' of technology transfer to the importing country.

Or take the example of Saudi Arabia. It realises that some cutting-edge technologies won't be shared or transferred and therefore its offset programme has evolved to harness commercially exploitable (transferred) technology, which has helped its offset-related domestic industry to already clock in billions in export sales.

Gunnar Eliasson, a professor of industrial economics at the Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, in his recently released book, Advanced Public Procurement as Industrial Policy, argues that there are four waves of spillovers of any technology, such as fighter aircraft manufacturing -- core, related, engineering and industrial technologies.

The value for country procuring high technology-led armaments is how its organises its industrial systems' absorptive capacity to leverages on such spillovers that can have long-term economic benefits in terms of spawning related industries, dual-usage commercial technologies.

Our offsets system, which has become virtually a government dictait-led windfall for big and small domestic players alike, should instead strive to create a defence industrial ecosystem of technology absorption, assimilation and innovation.
Source:Financial Express
Where’s the defence industry?

Restoration of Commutated Pension for PSU Officers demystified

Dear Brig Kamboj,
I am the President of a registered society, Wefare Association of Central Government Employees Absorbed in PSUs. Our members include both Armed Forces and Civilian employees who after a deputation period were absorbed in PSUs. After our absorption we have been treated as persona non grata in respect of our Government service

The letter dated 21st August, 2009 issued by the Department Of Ex-servicemen Welfare regarding restoration of pension of Armed Forces PSU absorbees is an exact replica of a similar letter issued on 15th September, 2008 regarding Civilian absorbees in PSUs as a result of which the Pension they were already drawing on 1/1/2006 was reduced. It was a cruel joke and the sole purpose was to nullify the benefits of a Supreme Court Judgment dated November 2006 against which Government filed a review petition which too dismissed in July 2007. The Department of Ex-servicemen welfare simply acted as a rubber stamp of the Department of Pensioners Welfare to extend the same injustice to us.

We have registered a strong protest to the Secretary Ex-servicemen Welfare of the Ministry of Defence against the above letter. To read the copy of protest letter dated 08 September, 2009, click here. The letter gives a step by step account of the injustice meted out to us since 1987. Since very few veterans know of our plight, I would request you to put that up on your web site for general information of all veterans and PSU Absorbees.

We have also mentioned that the following actions of the government although made applicable to Non- PSU Armed Forces Personnel also which are patently arbitrary, illegal and against the law of the land as per judgments of the Supreme Court:

Wrong notional fixation of pay of all Armed Forces pensioners wef 1/1/86 as up held by Hon'ble Supreme Court while dismissing Union of India SLP 14165 of 2005against the order of the Kerala High Court.

Not giving the benefit of full pension after a qualifying service of 20 years to Pre- 2006 Pensioners.

Discrimination between pre and post 2006 Disability pensioners in contravention to Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment dated 09.10.98 in the case of V Kasturi Vs MD, SBI in Civil Appeal No 5048 of 98. (1998(5) SCALE page 562) which ruled that the benefit of liberalised pension rules cannot denied to old pensioners based on the date of retirement.
Thank you,
Lt Col BR Malhotra (Retd)
Protest letter to Secretary Ex Service Welfare Department
Blog Link:
Restoration of Commutation for PSU Employed Officers

Restoration of Commutation: Officers employed in PSU's

Dear Brig Kamboj,
An officer from the Pay Cell has sent to me the attached documents through which the commuted portion of the pension of officers who went on deputation to PSUs has been restored.
You had referred the case of Brig Rao to me two months ago. This mail has come to me in response to the case which I sent to them.
I think this should cheer up our colleagues who took the 'plunge' many years ago!
With best wishes,
Maj Gen Surjit Singh (Retd)
slideshow

Riders yet to be debugged
Sir,
Unfortunately, the letter does not deal with restoration of commuted portion per se.
The orders for restoration of commuted portion were issued way back, but in certain cases the pension as per the pre-revised scales' commuted value was turning out to be more than the pension as per the revised scales. Hence the govt vide orders dated 27 May 2009 (enclosed herewith) for civil employees had merely directed that the affected personnel may continue drawing the pre-revised scales till the time the revised scales turn out to be more beneficial. Now vide this new letter dated 21 Aug 2009, the MoD has just accepted the govt letter for civil employees mutatis mutandis for such affected retirees from the armed forces. The only difference in commutation is (as was the case earlier too) that in case of civil employees, the commuted portion is 33% while for faujis it is 43% for Offrs and 45% for PBOR.

The letter dated 21 Aug 2009 is hence not a resolution of any separate anomaly for the armed forces and is not a restoration of full pension for PSU absorbees that has been an old (and correct) demand.

Just to remind the readers, while such absorbees are granted 100% pension commutation on joining PSUs / other autonomous bodies, the restoration of pension is only granted @33% (civilians) / 43% (Defence Offrs) / 45% (PBOR) after the prescribed period is over and the entire (100%) pension is not restored, now this is an anomaly which requires rectification and on which a logical decision has not been taken till date.
Regards
Maj Navdeep Singh
Advocate High Court