India continues to be placed on the Priority Watch List under the US Special 301 on account of USA’s assessment of Indian IPR protection being inadequate. The Special 301 Report issued by the United States under their Trade Act of 1974 is a un
The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India on 26.07.2018 pronounced a landmark decision on the issue of Proprietor of a trademark claiming monopoly over t
SHAPE OF PRODUCT, PROTECTED UNDER THE DESIGN ACT The Design Act in India protects only those Design, which are solely appealed by eye or in other
A dispute is considered arbitrable if: (i) it is covered by the Arbitration Agreement; (ii) parties refer the dispute to arbitration, in accorda
Posted by Priyadarsanan
I am a retired Ministry of Defence civilian officer. Superannuated in 2016.Was working as scientist in Directorate General of Aeronautical Quality Assurance (DGAQA) under Department of Production. DGAQA's actual duty as per official Business Rules is Quality Assurance and Final Acceptance of aircraft/equipment, but not any design function which is the duty of the DRDO. However, since the last 30 years, a scam of increasing magnitude has been spreading out in DGAQA whereby DGAQA's topmost officials pretend to hold design functions. Bogus defence equipment without any design,Transfer of license Technology, IP rights trace-ability or clearance from any of the design labs of DRDO or OEMs are being "accepted" and issued "Final Clearance" by a concerted action of errant officials in the ministry serving under the IAF,DGAQA and the DPSU M/s HAL.The bogus stores mentioned are all exorbitantly priced and supplied by private sector sub-contractors either directly to the IAF or through main contractor M/s HAL. Since I was not willing to collude with my official superiors, they have entered adverse entries in my ACR/APAR but without my knowledge. As a result, I was superseded in three consecutive Departmental Promotion Committees convened during 2005-2008. I had filed an OA in CAT Delhi (OA No.1606/2013) questioning my supersession through uncommunicated adverse enties but I have been told by my lawyer that the CAT is not agreeing to my request to communicate the adverse entry thereby denying me a chance for representing against those entries. The verdict came recently and is yet to be uploaded on CAT Delhi website. I am normally a resident of Bangalore, Karnataka and would like to pursue the case since the scam of unabated supply of bogus stores without any design has reached epidemic proportions , causing monetary loss to government and should be arrested in public interest, which, being a technical issue, the CAT has not considered. Could you please advise what course of action I should take to stop the scam and ensure that the IAF is supplied defence equipment with approved design only.
Updated on : 24/01/2019 08:32:05