Former director of Pasteur Institute of India (PII) in Coonoor, Dr N Elangeswaran, who was also one of the candidates for the post of DCGI in 2008, has alleged that the appointment of Dr Surinder Singh as the DCGI three years ago was made in violation of several recruitment norms.


The government’s recent decision to extend his tenure for a further period of nine months was also illegal, Dr Elangeswaran, who was also the former director of BCG Vaccine Lab in Chennai, said.


Claiming that he was the most eligible candidate, in qualification, expertise and experience for the post, he demanded that an inquiry should be conducted on the appointment of Dr Surinder Singh as DCGI in 2008. According to him all the private vaccine manufacturers in the country are supporting him extensively for all his misdeeds as he was in favour of them.


In the light of the Madras High Court order of July 20 this year staying the extension given to the DCGI, he said the DCGI cannot be given extension beyond five years. The period of deputation of a government servant should not exceed beyond five years. Dr Singh was the additional director at CRI Kasauli on deputation before 2007. He was the joint director at the National Institute of Biologicals, Noida before deputing to CRI, he said.


He said it is a clear violation that an official from an autonomous institution is given an appointment on deputation into a subordinate office. In a subordinate office, the promotion is depending on seniority available in the subordinate officers. A person from an autonomous institution cannot be deputed there. CRI is an institution under central health services, whereas NIB is an ICMR institution which is autonomous. According to Dr Elangeswaran, Dr Surinder Sing became the additional director at CRI because of the vested interest of some people. He is not in the feeder cadre, he is from outside.


Speaking to Pharmabiz, the vaccine expert said that Dr Singh had been made the ‘in-charge DCGI’ on 01. 02. 2008 before the formal interview for the post was held on 07 02 2008. Objecting to this temporary appointment, as a candidate in the panel for interview, Dr Elangeswaran approached the President of India saying that Dr Singh’s appointment as in-charge DCGI was in violation of norms because Dr Singh was also one of the candidates for the interview.


According to him, the in-charge position in any office has to be given to the senior most person of the same department. Dr Singh is not belonged to CDSCO, then how could he be given the in-charge?, he asks. Another question Dr Elangeswaran raised was that how could an in-charge DCGI attend the interview for the regular post.


Regarding some discrepancies in decisions made by Dr Singh as the highest drug controlling authority, Dr Elangeswaran said that as DCGI, Dr Singh issued an order on 12.02.2008 that the vaccine available at BCG VL, Chennai was not fit for human use and write off should be made by the unit. Further he sent a letter to Dr Elangeswaran while he was the director there that supply of BCG vaccine to the government centres after the closure of the unit was in violation of Drugs & Cosmetics Act. But the same DCGI, after the revocation of suspension of licence on 26. 02. 2010 wanted the unit to check whether the vaccine available at the unit was fit for human use, Dr Elangeswaran accuses.


His another allegation is that Dr Surinder Singh had caused a huge loss to the tune of Rs.100 crore to the government from 2008 to till date by closing down the three vaccine units in the public sector. He was favouring the private vaccine manufacturers, the former director of BCG VL and PIIC told Pharmabiz.