Hello readers,
Last post here (LINK) we showed you about how Hindustan Times published a false news about IIT Kharagpur while making lot of false charges against few individuals of the institute. Today we show you how Hindustan Times was manipulated by Rajeev Kumar, though onus still lies with HT for not getting in touch with IIT administration to get the true picture.
Check this article on HT where the reporter of the earlier article Mr Charusudan posted all the documents that he had with him to come to the conclusion.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/NewDelhi/Clarification-on-IIT-Kharagpur-pushing-pricey-laptops/Article1-670478.aspx
We downloaded the documents and checked. We found lot of documents being interpreted in a wrong manner while some even absent from the lot. We ask readers to download the pdf and keep it open for reference.
1. The whole set of document does NOT carry the most important document in this whole case, the Hyderabad quote document which implicates him with the fact that he wanted the laptop to be delivered to his son at Hyderabad. Also that document shows he submitted a quote to IIT Kharagpur which was valid for just ONE Day. We posted the same in our previous article (Document 4). Here's the link to the scan document. (IMAGE LINK). If this supposed to "All Document" as being said by HT, where is the above document? That do brings a question to our mind, how can we believe the above documents are complete, maybe more still might be there which could be against the professor's interest so HT is keeping it away from public eye.
2. The document set downloaded has a list - Annexure - II (Page 3). This is being shown as the "Rate Chart" by HT reporter to the public. But read the subject of the Annexure. It clearly say - EMPANELMENT OF LAPTOPS. Is the reporter aware of difference between an "Empanelment" list and "Rate Chart" list? This list with that title clearly shows is a bidding list for empanelment who gave the lowest quote. To produce it was the Rate Chart, how correct is that on the reporters part?
3. No single document shows IIT administration is asking or "Forcing" the professor to buy at higher price.
4. The professor through the reporter claims the laptop was being taken under CPDA Empanelment order. Why did he then send the purchase order to SRIC. Every IIT has SRIC structured unit and they are no way involved with CPDA purchase, they deal with only Project Purchases. If he needed laptop in that scheme, why didn't he send a CPDA requisition?
5. A purchase requisition for projects are sent to SRIC. Check the letter from SRIC to the professor in the previous article and even in this lot. (Image LINK). The Dean seem to be telling the professor clearly in no short terms that the CPDA empanelment order was NOT applicable for purchase of laptop for projects. And from his letter another message we can gather - The professor seem to be Insisting SRIC to follow the same CPDA purchase rules while buying laptop for projects.
6. As yet the reporter has not shown any proof that the professor followed the basic purchase procedure which is followed in every govt purchase. There is no document showing he made more than 2 quotes, which is the normal procedure, and he could have been easily sanctioned the lowest quote laptop. Why did he go on insisting his single quote be sanctioned even after repeated request from all concerned parties in the administration?
7. And the most funny part of this whole document set supposed to be a proof against IIT Kharagpur administration. In his conclusion part he substantiates his finding while comparing two laptops, both of different models - Dell M4500 and Dell XPS. The first thing any journalist would have done here was to cross check with dell about the two models to know the facts about their rates. All are aware of the fact that Dell M4500 is a much superior model than Dell XPS. To let the readers know about a fact - Dell was contacted by IIT Kharagpur and they clarified about the same while defending the different rates of the two model.
When you go through all these pointers, its now upon you get your take on this whole episode. Was the reporter doing this deliberately? What gain does the reporter has to malign IIT Kharagpur reputation? Or is he trying to do so at the behest of the professor (for reasons unknown)? Or is it that he really had less knowledge about the technical facts and got duped by the professor?
After going through all the above facts we come to a simple conclusion - the Pricy Laptop Issue to malign IIT Kharagpur, as projected by the journalist and Professor Rajeev Kumar, is a false bogus issue.
Now to come to the most interesting part of this whole maligning campaign. After downloading the document from the HT site, we did a checking on its properties. Viola! Do see who the Author of the said document is in the scan image below (Click on the image to see enlarged).
We leave it now upon readers to decide on a simple question - Don't you feel that Prof Rajeev Kumar is in fact deeply involved in acts of maligning the reputation of this institute!!!
Signing off for today with the screen shot with the hope - Truth would surely prevail. Cheers!!
Last post here (LINK) we showed you about how Hindustan Times published a false news about IIT Kharagpur while making lot of false charges against few individuals of the institute. Today we show you how Hindustan Times was manipulated by Rajeev Kumar, though onus still lies with HT for not getting in touch with IIT administration to get the true picture.
Check this article on HT where the reporter of the earlier article Mr Charusudan posted all the documents that he had with him to come to the conclusion.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/NewDelhi/Clarification-on-IIT-Kharagpur-pushing-pricey-laptops/Article1-670478.aspx
We downloaded the documents and checked. We found lot of documents being interpreted in a wrong manner while some even absent from the lot. We ask readers to download the pdf and keep it open for reference.
1. The whole set of document does NOT carry the most important document in this whole case, the Hyderabad quote document which implicates him with the fact that he wanted the laptop to be delivered to his son at Hyderabad. Also that document shows he submitted a quote to IIT Kharagpur which was valid for just ONE Day. We posted the same in our previous article (Document 4). Here's the link to the scan document. (IMAGE LINK). If this supposed to "All Document" as being said by HT, where is the above document? That do brings a question to our mind, how can we believe the above documents are complete, maybe more still might be there which could be against the professor's interest so HT is keeping it away from public eye.
2. The document set downloaded has a list - Annexure - II (Page 3). This is being shown as the "Rate Chart" by HT reporter to the public. But read the subject of the Annexure. It clearly say - EMPANELMENT OF LAPTOPS. Is the reporter aware of difference between an "Empanelment" list and "Rate Chart" list? This list with that title clearly shows is a bidding list for empanelment who gave the lowest quote. To produce it was the Rate Chart, how correct is that on the reporters part?
3. No single document shows IIT administration is asking or "Forcing" the professor to buy at higher price.
4. The professor through the reporter claims the laptop was being taken under CPDA Empanelment order. Why did he then send the purchase order to SRIC. Every IIT has SRIC structured unit and they are no way involved with CPDA purchase, they deal with only Project Purchases. If he needed laptop in that scheme, why didn't he send a CPDA requisition?
5. A purchase requisition for projects are sent to SRIC. Check the letter from SRIC to the professor in the previous article and even in this lot. (Image LINK). The Dean seem to be telling the professor clearly in no short terms that the CPDA empanelment order was NOT applicable for purchase of laptop for projects. And from his letter another message we can gather - The professor seem to be Insisting SRIC to follow the same CPDA purchase rules while buying laptop for projects.
6. As yet the reporter has not shown any proof that the professor followed the basic purchase procedure which is followed in every govt purchase. There is no document showing he made more than 2 quotes, which is the normal procedure, and he could have been easily sanctioned the lowest quote laptop. Why did he go on insisting his single quote be sanctioned even after repeated request from all concerned parties in the administration?
7. And the most funny part of this whole document set supposed to be a proof against IIT Kharagpur administration. In his conclusion part he substantiates his finding while comparing two laptops, both of different models - Dell M4500 and Dell XPS. The first thing any journalist would have done here was to cross check with dell about the two models to know the facts about their rates. All are aware of the fact that Dell M4500 is a much superior model than Dell XPS. To let the readers know about a fact - Dell was contacted by IIT Kharagpur and they clarified about the same while defending the different rates of the two model.
When you go through all these pointers, its now upon you get your take on this whole episode. Was the reporter doing this deliberately? What gain does the reporter has to malign IIT Kharagpur reputation? Or is he trying to do so at the behest of the professor (for reasons unknown)? Or is it that he really had less knowledge about the technical facts and got duped by the professor?
After going through all the above facts we come to a simple conclusion - the Pricy Laptop Issue to malign IIT Kharagpur, as projected by the journalist and Professor Rajeev Kumar, is a false bogus issue.
Now to come to the most interesting part of this whole maligning campaign. After downloading the document from the HT site, we did a checking on its properties. Viola! Do see who the Author of the said document is in the scan image below (Click on the image to see enlarged).
We leave it now upon readers to decide on a simple question - Don't you feel that Prof Rajeev Kumar is in fact deeply involved in acts of maligning the reputation of this institute!!!
Signing off for today with the screen shot with the hope - Truth would surely prevail. Cheers!!
No comments:
Post a Comment