Happy New Year 2012

Wish you a very Happy New Year 2012. 


May God exalt prosperous productive and corruption free 2012 in all aspects of your life

President Society for Scientific Values (SSV) promised help

Prof. K.L. Chopra Ex-Director, IIT, Kharagpur, President Society for Scientific Values (SSV) send the following email.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Kasturi Chopra <choprakl@xxx.com>
Date: Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 12:20 PM
Subject: Re: Rajya Sabha question " - Part II
To: Nilanjan Roy <knowmics@xxx.com>

Nilanjan : I admire you for your  efforts to seek justice. I hope you will succeed.

SSV is with you morally and mentally. We will certainly make a case study out of your efforts in due course.

Wishing you and your family a Peaceful and fruitful Year 2012

Prof (Dr) K. L. Chopra (Padamshri)
FNA, FASc, FNASc, FNAE, D.Sc.(hc)
(Former Director, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur)
President,Society for Scientific Values
Res : M-70, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi-110015

In the past SSV tried their level best to put NIPER in right track

Prof. K.L. Chopra Ex-Director, IIT, Kharagpur, President Society for Scientific Values in his email to Dr. Raghunath Anant Mashelkar, ex-DG CSIR &amp; Ex- Chairman BOG, NIPER wrote,

Dear Dr. Mashelkar

I have just seen the news that you have resigned as Chairman, NIPER. What happened to the Banerjee inquiry Report? If a plagiarist gets away due to maladministration or a biased committee of experts, SSV will not keep quiet and will hold all involved responsible for the miscarriage of justice. Please help us to see that the guilty gets exposed.

Best wishes

On Friday November 23 2007 16:31 Dr. Raghunath Anant Mashelkar, ex-DG CSIR &amp; Ex-Chairman BOG replied, with a cc to dstsec@nic.in  

My Dear Chopra Ji,

There were some ethical issues that were bothering me.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Incidentally, no one had raised a question, but I did this on my own.

The bitter experience of the early part of the year has converted this ‘innocent boy’ called Mashelkar into a ‘wise man’

I am not happy with the committee absolving Banerjee despite the blatant violation. I have sent the extra evidence also to them after the submission of the report.

It is up to Director (NIPER) and the new Chairman, Dr. Ramasami, to handel the matter.

His successor, Chairman BOG, NIPER  Dr. T. Ramasami, Secretary Covt. of India, Ministry of science and Technology wrote,

Dear Prof. Rama Rao,

I enclosed a copy of the mails received from Dr. R. A. Masalkar. The matter is self-explanatory. Kindly advice. Let us strategise. Our action and plans such that the NIPER stayed out of controversy

Kindest regards

Dr. T. Ramasami

Secretary DST

Rajya Sabha question 1900 asked by DR. JANARDHAN WAGHMARE "The TRUTH" - Part IV

DR. JANARDHAN WAGHMARE, Hon'ble Member of Parliament, Rajya Sabhva asked the question 

1900 (d) when was last financial audit conducted by Government and how does Government justify its approval of accounts of NIPER of the last three years?; in Rajya Sabha held on Friday, December 9, 2011/Agrahayana 18, 1933 (Saka)

Never, no financial audit conducted by Government


In 11th five-year plan NIPER received huge sums of money from GOI to create state of the art infrastructure for teaching and research on drug discovery and development. However like any other reputed institutes of the country the money is not put in the use of better good. With a nexus build with funding ministry and Director NIPER money was siphoned off for personal gains. 

Regarding siphoned off of 11^th five year plan money complain was lodged to CVC, as usual CVC forwarded it to CVO DoP and CVO did nothing. In fact the same CVO was disbursing officer of NIPER Grant.

In response to a RTI quarry CVO replied we have not received any such letter from CVC. When the same RTI send to CVC, CVC provided copies of letter and reminder send to CVO of DoP. In another RTI to DoP DoP said report was send to CVC, and three pages of the report was missing from CVC report. 

A. When the same is reported to CBI, CBI found cognizable offense is committed and it is under process of registering a case.

B. RTI is filed in Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers on 31/10/11 regarding action taken on CAG Audit, but no response received till date indicating no action taken.     

Rajya Sabha question 1900 asked by DR. JANARDHAN WAGHMARE "The TRUTH" - Part III

DR. JANARDHAN WAGHMARE, Hon'ble Member of Parliament, Rajya Sabhva asked the question 
1900 (a) details of observations/objections of CAG regarding loss occurred to National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (NIPER), Punjab; year-wise during past three years and action taken thereon;
 in Rajya Sabha held on Friday, December 9, 2011/Agrahayana 18, 1933 (Saka)

Despite of clear direction from BoG, NIPER administration decided not to follow a time table for preparation and submission of Annual Accounts, so that finds can be diverted at will. CAG report retrieved by RTI is clearly depicted the misappropriation. 
Loss/ misappropriation of 607.26 lakh Exchequer money during the year 2009-10 alone. Three years sum will be more
Another RTI is filed in Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers on 31/10/11 but no response received till date indicating no action taken.     

MINUTES OF THE 39TH MEETING OF THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS HELD ON 25-06-2003

Members Present :-
01. Dr.R.A.Mashelkar, DG/CSIR 
02. Sh.Sharad Gupta, Jt.Secy.(PI), DCPC/GOI 
03. Sh.Ashwani Kumar, DCGI(I/C)/N.Delhi.
04. Dr.S.K.Brahmchari, Director, IGIB/N.Delhi 
05. Ms Anita Bansal, CA & Director (Finance), DCPC/GOI: Representing FA, DCPC/GOI
06. Sh.G.Wakankar, Ex.Director, IDMA 
07. Dr.Nitya Nand, Lucknow 
08. Dr.Harkishan Singh, Chandigarh 
09. Dr. R.K.Nayak, Bhubneshwar
10. Dr.C.L.Kaul, Director, NIPER : Member 
11. Sh.Subrata Sarkar, Registrar, NIPER : Secretary

Leave of absence received from (1) Dr.C.M.Gupta, Director, CDRI, Lucknow,(2) Sh. S.K.Sharma, Director, PGIMER, Chandigarh, (3) Dr.N.H.Antiya Director, FMR, Mumbai, (4) Secretary, Technical Education, Punjab (5) Dr D.S.Brar, MD, Ranbaxy was recorded.

39.11 TO APPROVE AUDITED ACCOUNTS FOR THE YEAR 2001-2002.
Approved. However, for future guidance the Ministry representative requested NIPER to follow a time table for preparation and submission of Annual Accounts as under:-

1.     Appointment of Chartered Accountant -31st March every year.

2.    Compilation/finalization of accounts by the Institute-30th June every year.

3.    Accounts are to be certified by the Internal Auditors of the Institute by July Every year.

4.    Forwarding of the approved statement of account to AG, Punjab for audit/certificate within15 days on receipt from Internal Auditor of the Institute.

5.    Presentation of BOG for approval - in the first meeting to be held after receipt of audit report and certificate from AG, Punjab. 

6.    Hindi translation/printing of statement of accounts - within one month of approval of BOG. 

7.    Sending the Statement of Accounts to Ministry- within 15 days of the printing of report. 

8.    Forwarding of the Statement of Accounts by the Ministry to the Lok Sabha/Rajya Sabha Secretariat for laying – During session within 15 days of receipt of Statement of Accounts from the Institute, During Inter-Session - immediately at the start of the session.

However these steps were never followed leading to Loss/ misappropriation of 607.26 lakh Exchequer money during the year 2009-10 alone.

Para	Audit objection	Amount
Part II A Serious Irregularities Para 1	Loss of interest	49.56 lakh
Para 2	Loss of interest due to improper planning of purchase of imported equipments	52.70 lakh
Part II B Other Irregularities Para 3	Non levy of penalty	17.00 lakh
Para 4	Irregular purchase of imported equipments	432.98 lakh
Para 5	Incorrect fixation of Pay	17.68 lakh
Para 6	Blockage of funds in purchase of imported equipments	37.34 lakh
Total		607.26 lakh

Rajya Sabha question 1900 asked by DR. JANARDHAN WAGHMARE "The TRUTH" - Part II

DR. JANARDHAN WAGHMARE, Hon'ble Member of Parliament, Rajya Sabhva asked the question 
1900 (b) (b) details of various committees functioning at NIPER which have not been formed as per NIPER Act, Statutes and Ordinances;
 in Rajya Sabha held on Friday, December 9, 2011/Agrahayana 18, 1933 (Saka)


Truth is already communicated to BOG NIPER by DR. NEERAJ KUMAR and a case is filed CWP18789/2011 NEERAJ KUMAR & ANR. vs NIPER AND UOI  regarding wrong constitution of Senate and award of degree

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Neeraj <Neeraj@xxxxxx>
Date: Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 3:58 PM
Subject: Formal representation against Prof. K. K. Bhutani, Officiating Director, and Registrar, NIPER for violating NIPER Statute and ordinance
To: vishwamohan_katoch@xxxxxx


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Currently, I came to know that current officiating director has issued an order vide F-1-15(13)/2011/RGO/4578-99 dated 06.09.2011 to form new senate (Annexure-1) which is a violation of the NIPER act and statute with the following reasons:

1.  The first information of Senate NIPER (March 2009- March 2012) to its members was given in March followed by the 12^th Senate meeting in April 2009. 

2.  Officiating Director has terminated the existing senate before completion of its tenure of three years (March 2009 – March 2012), which is a violation of NIPER Act and Statutes as Senate is also a statutory body like BoG, Finance Committee etc. 

3.   As per NIPER Act section 13 and NIPER statute clause 3, there should be three persons from outside in Science, engineering and humanities and new senate will have 4 persons outside and one of them, Prof. H. S. Nigah is the previous member and also the yes man of current officiating director. 

4.  In the new senate, the representation of departments is not given rationally for example a) three faculties are from medicinal chemistry b) No faculty is from biotechnology department.

5.  While selecting associate and assistant professor, seniority has not been taken in consideration. For example, there is senior assistant professor than the selected assistant professor.

6. The senior professor from department of Pharmacology and toxicology has not been given the chance in the new senate who has not represented the senate; however there are few professors who are getting frequent chance for the same.

Thus, as a responsible employee of NIPER and responsible law abiding citizen of India, I humbly request you to look into the matter and enforce the conditions so that Institute should be run as per NIPER Act, Statute and ordinances.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


How Senate was made when NIPER was not Sick!!

MINUTES OF 31ST MEETING OF BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF NIPER HELD ON 24/10/2000 AT 11.30 HOURS UNDER THE CHAIRMANSHIP OF DR R.A.ASHELKAR, DIRECTOR-GENERAL, NEW DELHI.

The 31st meeting of Board of Governors of NIPER was held on 24th October, 2000 at 11.30 hours in the Conference Room of NIPER, S.A.S.Nagar (Mohali) under the Chairmanship of Dr R.A.Mashelkar, Director-General, Council of Scientific & Industrial Research, New Delhi.

This list of participants is enclosed.

Dr R.A.Mashelkar, Chairman, Board of Governors while welcoming all the members to the 31st meeting observed that the attendance for this meeting was rather thin. He felt that there was a need for the participation of members not only from the field of Education, Research but also from industries, as their guidance will be very useful for the Institute. It was also felt that the date for the next meeting may be finalized immediately so that sufficient notice for the meeting can be given to all the members sufficiently in advance.

Sh. N.Sundaram, Secretary of the BOG circulated copies of Govt. of India,Ministry of Chemicals & Fertilizers, Department of Chemicals & Petrochemicals (Finance Division) letter No.23(14)99-Fin. dated 20th October, 2000 which contained comments of the Finance Division on the agenda papers for the 31st meeting of Board of Governors of NIPER. The BOG took note of the same. Thereafter, the agenda items were considered in seriatim and the deliberations on the same are detailed.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

AGENDA ITEM NO.3 THE NOMINATION FOR THE SENATE AND VARIOUS COMMITTEE AS PER NIPER ACTS AND STATUS.

This agenda item as presented has been considered in the light of the fact that the draft statutes have already been perused by the Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers and returned to the Institute. The Board approved the following nominations:

Senate

Clause (c) of Section 12(b) of NIPER Act.

1)            Prof. K.K.Bhutani

2)            Prof. P.Rama Rao

3)            Prof. Ramesh Panchagnula

4)           Prof. U.C.Banerjee

5)           Prof. Saranjit Singh

Under Clause (d) of Section 12(b) of NIPER Act.

1)          Prof. S.N.Sharma (Education)

2)         Prof. B.N.Goswami (Humanities)

3)        Prof. Kewal Singh (Engineering)

Under Clause (e) of Section 3.2.1 of Statutes:

1)       Dr A.K.Chakraborty

Under Clause (f) of Section 3.2.1 of Statutes:

1)       Dr B.Gopalakrishnan

The tenure of the Senate will be for a period of three years.


Thus constitution of current senate without board discussion/nod is highly questionable

Rajya Sabha question 1900 asked by DR. JANARDHAN WAGHMARE "The TRUTH" - Part I

DR. JANARDHAN WAGHMARE, Hon'ble Member of Parliament, Rajya Sabhva asked the question 
1900 (c) whether the selection committee of NIPER had experts in fields other than their specialization and if so, how contracts of various faculty members have been renewed;


 in Rajya Sabha held on Friday, December 9, 2011/Agrahayana 18, 1933 (Saka)


Truth is already communicated to BOG NIPER by one of NIPER Employee. Moreover two cases regarding wrong formation of selection committee are filed  CWP19277/2011 NEERAJ KUMAR vs NIPER AND UOI and CWP21402/2011 PARIKSHIT BANSALvs NIPER AND UOI     

Recently a professor of Management is selected by HoD(s) of Natural products, Biotechnology and Med. Chemistry in absence of management expert. 

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: NIPER EMPLYEE <xxx@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 12:26 PM
Subject: Re: Some imporatnt facts needed to be known to honorable BoG members before finalization of 54th BoG minutes

To,
Professor V. M. Katoch,
Chairman, BoG NIPER, S.A.S. Nagar-160062.

Copy to: All BoG Members.

Sub: Reconsideration of selection committee recommendation for faculty promotion/renewal

Honorable BoG chairman,
In continuation my previous e.mail dated 15.08.2011, I am disclosing some real facts regarding selection committee (Contract renewal and Promotion under Career Advancement Scheme) with documentary proof which will be useful to this august body to make useful decision and bring transparency in NIPER.

I am again re-emphasizing that I am an employee of NIPER and sending this mail in this way because I am in fear that NIPER administration will be after me if I will disclosed my identity. In spite of this, once I will be assured for my security, I will disclose my identity.

I would like to mention that NIPER statutes adopted the only criterion for promotion is “excellence” and criterion for promotion under CAS is also very stringent as reproduced below.

NIPER has adopted IIT scale of Pay for faculty and staff members. The faculty members promoted/ renewal given by this selection committee are not worthy as per IIT criteria  (Annexure I). It is also observed that this committee and committees in the past has taken a generous approach of doling promotion when it comes to Faculty member’s promotion but the same is not true in case of other scientific staff and administrative staff. In fact there is no promotion policy existed for any member of NIPER staff other then faculty. 

More over the constitution of the present selection committee is not as per NIPER statutes. Facts related to the selection committee for the interview held on 29.10.2009 are as given below:

a)     The formation of selection committee by the NIPER statute should be:

Selection committee constitution as per NIPER statute under CAS (NIPER statute, Clause 3.6)

It is very clear that the same committee can Promote and also renew the tenure of the Faculty without any influence by Dean and HOD of the institute.

However the constitution of the selection committee based on whose recommendation BOG has given decision is flawed. Constitution of the committee was,

1.     Dr. Nityanand (Chairman)

2.     Dr. K. K. Talwar (academician nominated By BOG)

3.      Prof. Rama Rao (Director NIPER Ex offitio)

4.     And two subject expert.

As per Annexure II Dr. C. L. Kaul Ex Director NIPER served an expert in Four diverse subject area namely Pharmacology (his subject), Pharmaceutical analysis (Not his area), Pharmaceutical technology (IPR, not his area), Pharmacoinformatics (not his area).

Moreover Dr. V. K. Kapoor having only eight publication on analytical/synthetic chemistry became expert in natural products (Annexure III) for the selection/renewal of his friend Prof. K. K. Bhutani. it is also pertinent to mention that the same man is is also member of ten different committees in NIPER and have vested interest in Prof. K. K. Bhutani.

Further more a highly biased person like Professor Saranjit Singh was also present in the committee in the capacity of Dean NIPER.

Comments of Ombudsmen Committee about his ego and behavior are reproduced below. 

The Review Committee perused the statements/depositions of Prof. Saranjit Singh, who stated that, “he does not want to make any comment about the academic performance of Dr. Animesh Roy and once we decided to terminate him, it does not matter whether he is good or outstanding scientist or bad. So accordingly we terminated his services. Dr. Animesh Roy is a short tempered person and had hurt our egos, as he doesn’t respect us. He further suggested that if Dr. Animesh Roy services are reinstated based on his academic strength – he will support only on one condition that, he may be appointed in any other new NIPER, but not in NIPER, Mohali. However, if his services are reinstated in NIPER, Mohali, we four people will resign from NIPER under protest, as we can not tolerate him or his presence in NIPER, Mohali at any cost.”
This above statement of Prof. Saranjit Singh was an eye opener for the Committee as it was a out burst of his ego which leads to objectivity, when the person with this type of mind set can never be objective.

(Ombudsmen Committee report, Page#78, para 18)

Thus, based on these bare facts it is clear that, the present selection committee worked in a biased manner and promoted nepotism and should be ignored.

I strongly feel that this will help to August body to understand the pain of NIPER employee and to take right decision to bring transparency in the institute for the interest of Institute and the nation.

I am also sending this mail to officiating director and registrar NIPER to verify the facts stated in the mail. Every statement is having particular reference for verification.

Sincerely,
One of NIPER employee.

Merry Christmas

Wish for Merry Christmas and corruption free India in 2012

No removal of anti-corruption contents

Take off offensive content, court tells social websites - The Times of India:
NEW DELHI: Even as the controversy over IT minister Kapil Sibal urging social networking sites to censor offensive content rages on, a trial court has directed several sites, including Facebook, Google, Orkut and Youtube, to remove "anti-religious" or "anti-social" content "promoting hatred or communal disharmony".

Interesting point to note; Court did not order to remove anti-corruption contents to remove.

Why we need an independent strong Lokpal

Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) is created to put an end to corrupt babudom; but the way it is structured, it actually enhanced corruption by babus. 

CVC has minimal infrastructure and manpower (250 employees and rented office space). To work on corruption CVC designated a Central Vigilance Officer (CVO) in every government department to inquire and take action on corruption complains. When the complain received by CVC, CVC simply forwards the complain to CVO and depends on the moral and ethics of CVO for proper disposing off the complain in a time bound manner. If CVO is corrupt then the complain ends up in cold storage.

An example of corrupt babu culture under the nose of CVC is as under

National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (NIPER), an institute of National importance, under Department of Pharmaceuticals (DoP) within Ministry of Chemical and Fertilizers (C&F).  NIPER runs solely on GOI funding and receives funding from five-year plan of GOI.

In 11th five-year plan NIPER received huge sums of money from GOI to create state of the art infrastructure for teaching and research on drug discovery and development. However like any other reputed institutes of the country the money is not put in the use of better good. With a nexus build with funding ministry and Director NIPER money was siphoned off for personal gains. 

Regarding siphoned off of 11^th five year plan money complain was lodged to CVC, as usual CVC forwarded it to CVO DoP and CVO did nothing. In fact the same CVO was disbursing officer of NIPER Grant.

In response to a RTI quarry CVO replied we have not received any such letter from CVC. When the same RTI send to CVC, CVC provided copies of letter and reminder send to CVO of DoP. In another RTI to DoP DoP said report was send to CVC, and three pages of the report was missing from CVC report. 

When the same is reported to CBI, CBI found cognizable offense is committed and it is under process of registering a case.

Thus CVC is a utter failure to prevent corrupt cycle of babudom and useless to prevent corruption? They ask the same corrupt guy to inquiry the matter of corruption. 


What is the answer then.................independent Strong Lokpal.  

We are waiting...................

Answer vis-a-vis truth supported by documentary evidence will be published at this site.

Success vs Failure

Corruption a 'HIGH-PROFIT LOW-RISK BUSINESS'

"The fear of God is gone, and so is the fear of law. Few are caught and fewer convicted-of every 100 corruption related crimes. All this has made corruption a 'high-profit low-risk business'".


D.R. Karthikeyan, Former director of the CBI and DG, National Human Rights Commission.


BE A WHISTLEBLOWER: The most effective thing that individuals can do is to complain when they see corrupt acts occurring. This can be difficult when your superiors are the ones who are misbehaving! But not impossible


FILE RTI: Access to official information through RTI is legal. Get information for R&D projects, infrastructure projects of your organization and inform the people there. Officials may be asked to explain why the money has not gone where it should have, and can be shamed into changing their behavior in future.

DE-WEED THE SYSTEM: When you see opportunities to remove unnecessary blockages in systems that serve no useful purpose but which create opportunities for corruption, write to ministers, MPs, MLAs, newspapers, media drawing attention to the reforms needed.

NIPER corruptions are about to be exposed @RAJYA SABHA

RAJYA SABHA

Questions for WRITTEN ANSWERS

Asked at a sitting of the Rajya Sabha held on Friday, December 9, 2011/Agrahayana 18, 1933 (Saka)

Functioning of NIPER, Punjab

1900. DR. JANARDHAN WAGHMARE: Will the Minister of CHEMICALS AND FERTILIZERS be pleased to state:

(a) details of observations/objections of CAG regarding loss occurred to National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (NIPER), Punjab; year-wise during past three years and action taken thereon;

(b) details of various committees functioning at NIPER which have not been formed as per NIPER Act, Statutes and Ordinances;

(c) whether the selection committee of NIPER had experts in fields other than their specialization and if so, how contracts of various faculty members have been renewed; and

(d) when was last financial audit conducted by Government and how does Government justify its approval of accounts of NIPER of the last three years?

Point to be noted:

The answer will be provided in writing to RAJYA SABHA soon. 

Answer vis-a-vis truth supported by documentary evidence will be published at this site.