Conflict of interest in startup funding panel ‘unavoidable’, says Technology Development Board secretary
Conflict of interest in selecting expert panels to disburse public funds for technology startups is “unavoidable” and a matter “to be managed,” Technology Development Board (TDB) secretary Rajesh Pathak said on Friday.His remarks came after the government disclosure in Parliament on July 30, followed by media reports, that members of an expert panel constituted by the TDB had financial links to companies that they adjudicated as eligible for public funds.The TDB, affiliated to the Department of Science and Technology (DST), is among the agencies selected to channel money under the Centre’s ₹1 lakh crore Research, Development and Innovation (RDI) Fund. As of July, the TDB has approved support for 22 projects—a company can be part of multiple projects—involving ₹2,192 crore of RDI financing.In response to questions from Congress MP Praveen Chakravarthy in the Rajya Sabha on July 30, the DST identified the members of TDB’s Investment Committee. The committee is chaired by Dr. Saurabh Srivastava and includes K.R.S. Jamwal (Tata Industries), Lalithesh Katragadda, Sudhir Mehta, Sanjay Nayak, Anand Deshpande, Gopal Srinivasan, Debashish Bhattacharjee, Bala C. Deshpande, Jaswinder Ahuja and Sudhir Sethi, with the TDB secretary serving as member-secretary without voting rights.The same parliamentary disclosure stated that several companies approved for TDB funding had received funding from organisations represented on the Investment Committee or TDB’s Governing Board. These include Noccarc Robotics, EndureAir Systems, e-TRNL Energy, Dhruva Space, BigEndian Semiconductors, Astrome Technologies, Peptris Technologies and Serigen Mediproducts in relation to Dr. Saurabh Srivastava; Noccarc Robotics, EndureAir Systems, Tejas Networks, BigEndian Semiconductors, Peptris Technologies, ThinkMetal and Manastu Space Technologies in relation to K.R.S. Jamwal; Ather Energy and Tejas Networks in relation to Sanjay Nayak; Serigen Mediproducts in relation to Anand Deshpande; Agnikul Cosmos in relation to Gopal Srinivasan; Neo Seekermetals in relation to Debashish Bhattacharjee; and Replus Engitech in relation to Sudhir Mehta.“When we were formulating guidelines, it was clear that conflict of interest was unavoidable because experts (in identifying technology start-ups) will almost certainly have direct or indirect financial connections to the innovation ecosystem. However, such conflicts of interest can be managed, and we have clear guidelines,” said Mr. Pathak.These include members disclosing any financial interest in the companies being evaluated, leaving the room when any of their companies are being discussed. “There are 11 voting members in the committee. Following a recusal, a selected committee has to be voted on not by a simple majority but a super majority,” said Mr. Pathak. He explained that in a scenario involving 11 members, one needs at least eight to approve funding. “Moreover, companies where the expert committee members are promoters or board directors are straightaway not considered – irrespective of merit. However, if they have indirect stakes through funds, it may be permissible.”The RDI Fund, conceived to increase private-sector investment in research and development, is intended to support startups and companies developing technologies at Technology Readiness Level (TRL)-4 and above—a stage at which a technology has moved beyond laboratory proof-of-concept and its components have been validated in a laboratory environment, making it ready for further development towards commercialisation. The scheme aims to bridge the shortage of long-term capital for high-risk technologies in sectors such as deep technology, biotechnology, artificial intelligence and energy transition.Unlike conventional government grant programmes, the RDI Fund does not fina
Discussion (0)