You are on page 1of 7

From,

Mrs. Jaya Prakash


W/o Sri Birendra Kumar, Manager (QC)
House No.-B-66, Ashokpuri
Khajpura, Bailey Road
Patna, PIN-800001

Date: 28.08.12

An Open Letter
To,
Dr. Amar Singh, IAS
Chairman and Managing Director
Food Corporation of India
Head Quarter, 16-20
Barakhamba Lane, New Delhi-110001
Sub: From Advertisement to Appointment of AGM (QC): Flawed or Forged?
Sir,
My self Jaya Prakash w/o Sri Birendra Kumar, Manager (QC) posted at
FCI, Regional Office, Patna is being forced to write you owing to injustice to
my husband which has gone beyond tolerable limits. It is not under stood how
your few officers can play with rules and regulations and has made a false
report of document verification during interview for the post of AGM (QC) in
the name of recruitment agency. My husband has been denied appointment
despite he has obtained 65.99 marks and must be in merit list at Sr. No. 5
published by FCI.
I wish to bring to your kind attention certain facts which have come to
my notice on various aspects through my RTI or by other means from
advertisement to appointment for the post of AGM (QC) advertised in
employment news dated 08.01.2011. It is difficult to believe that everything has
just happened at every stage which more likely appears being cooked,
definitely, not alone by the recruitment agency.
I) Advertisement for the post of AGM (QC): As per FCI (Staff) Regulation 1971
the basic qualification for the post of AGM (QC) is Degree in Agriculture or
Degree in Science with diploma in Food Technology or Masters Degree in
Zoology or Biochemistry or equivalent qualifications.
Apart from basic qualification, 5 years experience in storage of food
grains and maintenance of stock or in the examinations, inspection and analysis
of food grains in Govt. or Public/Private Ltd. Undertakings.

The desirable was knowledge of toxicology of insecticides, raticides and


fumigants in use in grains stock.
From the above facts as cited in FCI (Staff) Regulation 1971 the basic mandate
towards requirements for the post of AGM (QC) is clear that the applicant
experience must be related with food grain storage, inspections and analysis.
Now looking on the advertisement where in one line has been added as
For the post of AGM (QC), the experience acquired as Junior/Senior Research
Fellow while pursuing higher studies will be reckoned as the requisite
experience. This line was incorporated in the advertisement without
amendment in FCI (Staff) Regulation 1971 by any notification which appears
prime facia a violation of FCI (Staff) Regulation 1971.
In one of my RTI, it has been cited by FCI HQ New Delhi that it was
reckoned with the approval of Board of Directors which too appears has been
forged. The copy of minutes of the Agenda item No. 96/2007[309th
Urgent(Adj.)-BD] provided by FCI HQ depicts that it was a mere agreeing of
board of directors with proposal which is stating that For the post of AGM
(QC), the experience acquired as junior/senior fellows while pursuing higher
studies should be reckoned as the requisite experience. Merely agreeing with
proposal does not mean that the same was approved and the same need to be
verified that whether the proposal was approved or not at later stage. It is
worth to mention here that several amendment / substitution vide various
notifications have been occurred in FCI (Staff) Regulation 1971 including for the
post of technical cadre of staff lastly on 14.06.2011 that too must would have
been based on approval of Board of directors.
More interestingly, the board was clear in his views that junior/senior
fellows should be covered under the proposal which means all M.Sc. and Ph.D.
students should be covered under the proposal. Nowhere the term research
was there wherein board had agreed with the proposal. So is it Forged?
Whether forged line was added in the advertisement without necessary
amendment / substitution by Notification in FCI (Staff) Regulation 1971
illegally?
II) Relevance of JRF/SRF: It is to clarify here that JRF is a temporary post in
various research projects with fixed emoluments with HRA or post M.Sc.
award/ stipend/ fellowship with applicable benefits for conducting research
during Ph.D. JRF is exclusively post M.Sc. period and being provided by CSIR,
DBT, ICMR, ICAR, GATE, JEST or others. ICAR is providing a separate

fellowship named ICAR-JRF (PGS) to promote the various research activities for
PG students which has no resemblance with premier JRF in projects for post PG
students. So any other fellowships given at any agricultural institution either
through national body or state agricultural universities during Masters degree
has similar objective and similar experience. In one of the RTI reply from
premier agricultural institute of India that is IARI has provided following
information which is self-explanatory and is as underSr. No.
RTI Question
Whether all the Indian students who are getting
1

3
4

Reply
NO

admission to Masters Degree Programme (PG


Courses) in all the disciplines at IARI are getting
ICAR JRF fellowship ?
Is it correct that Indian PG students who are not
Yes, on the advice of
getting ICAR JRF during Masters Degree
Standing committee
Programme may get IARI fellowship during subsequently approved by
Masters Degree Programme?
Academic council of
institute.
Is it correct that any Indian student may pursue his
YES
Masters Degree Programme at IARI despite he has
no fellowship at all?
Is there any difference in PG Courses offered at IARI
NO
for Indian students who are getting admission with
ICAR JRF in comparison to Indian students who are
getting admission without ICAR JRF but having
IARI fellowship?
Whether IARI is providing any extra semester /
NO
extra course / extra equipment facility for research
work / extra guidance for research work / extra
library facility to the Indian PG students with ICAR
JRF in comparison to Indian PG students without
ICAR JRF?
Is there any discrimination by IARI between Indian
students who are having ICAR JRF during Masters
Degree Programme and Indian students who are
not having ICAR JRF during Masters Degree
Programme?

NO

So few officers of FCI cannot play in the name of ICAR-JRF (PGS) taking the
guard of recruitment agency, which was neither the part of advertisement nor
was proposed in FCI Board of Director meeting.
III) Issuance of Admit Card: There appear grave anomalies in screening of the
application forms while issuing admits cards. After uploading of admit cards
after through screening under defined parameters, several representations were

submitted from different applicants. Its totally surprising that when it was
screened as per certain norms or protocol, then why huge number of admit
cards were issued without adhering any guidelines or norms. It is being said that
huge number of applicant visited FCI Hqrs and managed to get admit cards
issued. What it means that there was no guidelines or something got managed?
IV) Question papers in written examination: Though its difficult to finger on
this aspect as the incidence may be a matter of chance but overall scenario turns
the needle of suspicion towards possible fraud of question papers for the post
of AGM (QC) too. It is worth to mention here that the most of technical
papers questions were from a specific guide that too with all the similar choices
- word by word - in same order as specified in guide. Reference can be cited as
from book Objective Agriculture by S. R. Kantawa.
Page No-1
Page No-4
Page No-5
Page No-9
Page No-10
Page No-13
Page No-14
Page No-15
Page No- 16
Page No- 18
Page No-19
Page No-64
Page No-96
Page No-121
Page No-144

: Q.
: Q.
: Q.
: Q.
: Q.
: Q.
: Q.
: Q.
: Q.
: Q.
: Q.
: Q.
: Q.
: Q.
: Q.

No. 12
No. 54, 59, 61
No. 78
No. 129
No. 140
No. 181
No. 197, 198
No. 212
No. 223
No. 250
No. 261
No. 66
No. 103, 106
No. 136, 149
No. 229

These were few memory based questions marked after exams out of 60
wherein actual may be more or from similar another guide and there are every
possibility of fraud that can come in suspicious mind due to overall scenario.
V) Interview: It is specifying here that lot of candidates were not allowed to
appear in interview. Its through investigation will clearly bring the picture in
front of you that there was a gross violation of proposal of Board of Directors
in the 309th URGENT (ADJ.)-BD held on 28.12.2007 where in proposal was
made the For the post of AGM (QC), the experience acquired as junior/senior
fellows while pursuing higher studies should be reckoned as the requisite
experience. Here its clear that all M.Sc. students irrespective of fellowships are

junior fellows and all Ph.D. students are senior fellows. Hence debarring the
candidates from interview in the name of fellowship was totally illegal. More
surprisingly even candidates with fellowships from concerned universities were
debarred from interview. It was told at that time to such candidates that
fellowships from any national body/organisation only would be considered.
Definitely it was planned conspiracy to accommodate few candidates who
were the part of conspiracy in connivance with few FCI officers and
recruitment agency. It has also come to notice that three candidates were
interviewed at much later stage i.e. nearly one year after first interview on the
direction of Honble High Court of Punjab & Haryana.
VI) Issuance of appointment letter without publication of result: It is difficult to
believe for any one that FCI can indulge in such activity but its a die-hard fact
that appointment letters were issued without publication of result for the post
of AGM (QC) in any public domain. It was a big organised fraud on the part of
FCI. FCI had favoured for the wrongly selected candidates and make them to
join the FCI illegally to avoid objection from actual deserving candidates
through court or by any other means. By indulging in such activity, FCI has also
killed the normal human rights of the applicants. However after getting
pressure from RTI or from other corners, FCI uploaded the result on its web
site nearly after one month of issuance of appointment letter.
VII) Issuance of appointment letters through web site: This was one of the
prime violations of protocol of process of appointment. For all other posts of
the same advertisement, no appointment letter was issued through web site.
Then why for the post of AGM (QC) it was issued through web site that too
without publication of result. Definitely it was a part of fraud on the behalf of
certain officers of FCI posted at Head Quarter, New Delhi.
VIII) Uploading of appointment letters on web page other than meant for
publication of result: It is also a truth that appointment letters were uploaded
on web page not meant for that purpose. It was not uploaded on the link
where results were being published which clearly indicates that FCI was trying
to do it secretly to make the fraud successful.
IX) Issuance of appointment letter for non-departmental candidate through FCI
web page link meant for routine transfer of Cat-I staff and staffs posted at FCI,
HQ, New Delhi: The web page link Personnel > Posting /Transfers
/Promotions order is primarily meant for transfer posting of Cat-I FCI
employees as well as other employees posted at FCI HQ New Delhi. But by
violating the normal protocol appointments letters were uploaded on above

link for candidates selected under direct recruitment


departmental candidates which was a part of planned fraud.

including

non-

X) Call for vigilance clearance before publication of result: Its also a part of big
organised fraud where in vigilance clearance was called confidentially before
publication of result which was not the normal protocol of appointment. For
all other posts advertised in same advertisement the protocol followed was first
publication of result, then issuing appointment letters by post, calling for
vigilance clearance and then taking appointment. Definitely the episode was a
part of planned gimmick and fraud.
XI) Up-loading of appointment letter for non-departmental candidate at later
stage by changing the serial no. of already uploaded letters: on 22.03.12
appointment letters were uploaded to only 6 departmental candidates. Sri
Birendra Kumar by not seeing his name among the candidates to whom
appointment letters were issued with no further information from any corner
rushed to the FCI, HQ, New Delhi on 26.03.12. However no information was
given by HQ. Hence one RTI application was submitted immediately by hand
on 26.03.12. However after returning from HQ New Delhi it was found that
number of appointment letters was increased by replacing the other office
order which were uploaded after 26.03.12. It shows the complete fraud in
uploading the appointment letters in back date as fresh stay of court on issuing
appointment letters were expected.
XII) Fake document verification report submitted by recruitment agency in
connivance with FCI officers deputed for document verification & conducting
interview- The document verification report is totally fake where in it has been
claimed by the FCI in the name of recruitment agency that Sri Birendra Kumar
had not produced the documents regarding experience before interview. Its a
complete fraud as Sri Birendra Kumar had produced all documents in original
before interview and only after its through verification he was allowed to
appear in interview.
XIII) Cheating / fraud by recruitment agency / FCI: Its also a matter of great
surprise that after more than one year of interview and with repeated RTI /
representation, it has been communicated by the FCI in the name of
recruitment agency that Sri Birendra Kumar had not produced the documents
regarding experience before interview which is totally false. Even it was the
moral as well as legal responsibility of FCI to communicate the applicant if any
such matter was there who was waiting for result for more than 10 months. FCI

has not only traumatised the applicant by making fraud and keeping the
applicant in dark but the entire family of the applicant is in trauma.
With all the above scenario I plea for justice to my husband. There
appears violation of rules, regulations and protocols at every stage. I hope for
an independent enquiry of entire episode in respect of above facts which
primarily appears forged not flawed.

Yours faithfully

(Jaya Prakash)
Copy to
1) Sri S. P. Kar
Executive Director (Vig.)
Food Corporation of India
Head Quarter, 16-20
Barakhamba Lane, New Delhi-110001
2) Sri Anoop Kumar, IAS
Transparency officer
Food Corporation of India
Head Quarter, 16-20
Barakhamba Lane, New Delhi-110001

(Jaya Prakash)