FIGHT AGAINST THE ATTEMPT OF IMPOSING THEIR SUPREMACY AND DISCOURAGING ENTREPRENEURSHIP
REQUEST FOR JUSTICE FROM ECIL-DAE
INFORMATION TO THE TOP MANAGEMENT AND VIGILANCE
REQUEST FOR JUSTICE FROM ECIL-DAE
INFORMATION TO THE TOP MANAGEMENT AND VIGILANCE
Request for justice in case of the supplied
Fuse Links –PO M-3571
Fuse Links –PO M-3571
& Fuse holder - Purchase Order
No.R-6357M/3832
THE RECEIVER DETAILS CAN BE SEEN AS THAT OF ECIL FOR THE PROOF AND CONFIRMATION OF PAYMENT OF GST TO THE GOVT FOR THE SAKE OF MATERIAL SUPPLIED TO ECIL. OTHER DETAILS OF INDIVIDUAL ORDERS ARE SHOWN BELOW
For the kind
attention of the concerned QC official at ECIL. , Purchase Division, Head of
the RPD division and the VIGILANCE department.
Respected sir/madam
Greetings
You are
hereby requested to kindly update me with the Payment status of the
qualified fuses material supplied to RPD-ECIL on 7th January against
the PO M-3571. Nowthat 86 days are completed you are requested to kindly
see that the concerned payment is done soon. The concerned GST amount has been
payed by me to avoid any discrepancy with the financial department and the Tax
invoice was provided on the day of supply itself. Also the GST for Fuse
holders was also paid even without any clarity of thought from the indenter or
the QC department. Request you to kindly update me with the status
of the of Fuse holders supplied against the purchase order 3832. If the QC
testing process has been initiated . Request you to share with me the report of
the third party lab testing as it was mentioned on 24th February that it will
take about 10 days to get the report and it has been 24 days by today.
Iam here to inform you that the fuse links with current rating
1A supplied against the PO-3571 have been rejected. The concerned ISRV
& documentation with CIR NO- EO1749 has been attached for your kind
reference information & confirmation..
Hereby in this regards request you to kindly clarify me with few
discrepancies found in the documentation and few queries/doubts arised in
me due to the discrepancies found.
Discrepancies
& Questionnaire :-
1. As per the Inward inspection report dated 25-02-2020 on the CIR No.
E01749 , Observations are in Annexure sheet-1 and Remarks if any in Annexure
sheet-2. In the S.no.2 of the Annexure 2 RE 2A & RE 2A5 are
mentioned and in (b) its mentioned that component with RE2AS marking was not
blown at 4,2A for 15 minutes & quantity tested is 2 nos. only. .In
(c) of Annexure 2 its again mentioned about RE 2AS to be blown at 2 sec
at 5.25 A but the nos. are not mentioned
2. In the Annexure sheet 1. S.no.1 there are observations of 6
numbers of fuses tested for blow out time out of which two observations are
about RE 2A5 tested at 4.2 A. Its mentioned that one is not blown after 13 minutes and other not blown after
20 minutes .. Whereas in Annexure 2 its mentioned as 15 minutes for RE 2AS at 4.2 A.
3. Its mentioned in the top "Blow
time at the rate of 210% of rated current" , then why one fuse was
given current of 5.25A for the fuse of 2 A rating .
4. In S.no.1 of the Anexure sheet 1 when a fuse link of 2A rating that
is not blown even after 20 minutes at
supplied current of 210% of the rating ie., 4.2 A is qualified and
considered to be passed in the QC test then why the fuse Link of S.no.3 of
Anexure sheet-1 which is of 1 A rating is rejected when it is blown at certain time of 25 sec, 5 minutes, 3 minutes and
1.5 minutes.? Are you testing the burning saturation point or capacity of fuse
to withstand the current or the time it can stay without burning @ 210% of
rated current ? A clarity of test is missing.
5. For S.no.1 with Quantity of 1200 nos. supplied if only 6 nos of
samples are tested for Blow time then for S.no.3 for quantity supplied to be
730 nos. what for 8 nos. of samples have been tested
6. When CIR was generated on 2nd February and signed by QC TM in-charge
on 29th February for qualifying S.no.1, 2,4 & 5 & rejecting
S.no.3..what for there is a handwritten statement of testing for 2 more nos on
2nd march 2020 for qualified fuse links in S.no 4 and S.no.5
7. For the failed item of fuse links of 1A rating in S.No.3 I have the
following queries and request you to kindly support me with clarification and
required confirmation
1. As per the discrepancy in the current rating as mentioned in
S.no 3 above for the blow time mentioned above I have doubt of the current
provided to the fuse links for the blow time that is mentioned as excessive
than 10 sec.
2. As equivalent to all other types it was qualified in all tests of
electrical continuity in all 730 nos, performance check with the withstanding
capacity check for 20 nos., operating voltage & current was found to be
suitable as per specification then why it will have the characteristic of
failing in the blow test only and in 4 nos only. In such a scenario a decision
of testing for 3 more nos. could have been taken because its sample test.
3. When a decision was taken for testing two more samples for the
qualified items then why can't a thought of testing two more samples for failed
item when it is worthy enough in all other parameters.
4. What standard test format or procedure has been followed for testing
the fuse links? Any reference of JSS55555 or BIS documents as per Indian
standards has been considered for conditions, parameters & its levels to
initiate cum conducting the testing? Request you to share the test procedure
followed.
5. Confirmation of the calibrated equipment used for testing ?
6. In the process of testing Burning capacity/time setup for another
type of fuse this 1 A fuse might been tested by mistake..ie., if correct
current rating is provided or not and if given to the same item to be tested at
that rating or not.
7. If tested Independently or in connection with the other fuses or in
a continuity circuit link.?
8. At what confirmed voltage it was tested and if any variation in
voltage or current was not there during testing period.
8. For the items in S.no.1 of the
Annexure 1 which have been mentioned "not be blown after 13
minutes" & "20 minutes" I request you to kindly provide me
with the samples for my reference,verification, clarification &
testing.
9. In case of 2A fuse links if it has been qualified considering the
qualification of the majority of the samples tested then the same is applicable
for 1A fuse links aswell for qualification of the LOT.
10. It is understood in the CIR that the
testing of the parameters as per the datasheet provided by our company has been
done which implies that a design test is done in comparison to the
data provided by us but not the qualification test as per your need or a
record of your need/requirement.
11. Further to say its all a qualification test (for
example continuity check etc.,) that could have been done at your
place where as for acceptance test while
doing a sort of destructive test (like the Blow test) it should have been done
in a NABL accredited lab. May I ask if it was NABL
accredited lab wherein the blow test was conducted.
12. In case of the rejection of any material the usual practice is to
provide the tested samples that have been the cause of rejection back to the
supplier which has been done but Blow test
samples in the pack were 7 nos. Failed pack had 2 nos. Performance check pack
had 20 nos and the lot pack has 703 nos. ie., 703+20+2+7=732 nos
13. You mentioned of received material to be 730 nos & returning 730
Nos whereas the qty received in return itself by us was 732 nos. and should
have received one more number in the blow test pack since 8 nos were tested as per the Annexure 1 sheet.
14. The mismatch in the quantity of nos
mentioned is a discrepancy leading to another doubt the validity of the nos.
mentioned as receipt of the nos.by
ECIL
15. Further it has been mentioned in the on the material packet &
the CIR sheet attachment that all received 730
nos. have been FAILED which is not valid statement. You may
mention it to be rejected lot but not as failed because in your selected
samples of 20 nos for testing all have been
qualified in the regular others test except the blow test in which
aswell 4 nos out of 8 nos. have been qualified
Request you to kindly acknowledge the receipt of the mail with
your comments and suggestion allowing us to serve ECIL and provide our best
services to ECIL .
Looking forward for
your response
Thanking you in advance
Best regards
Prashant
LSPC Mansion,
H.No:
3-201, HIG,
Lane Opposite Lakshmi SBI Homes,
HUDA, Mayuri Nagar, Miyapur,
Hyderabad - 500049
Telangana, INDIA.
Lane Opposite Lakshmi SBI Homes,
HUDA, Mayuri Nagar, Miyapur,
Hyderabad - 500049
Telangana, INDIA.
Phone::+91-8885583926
Information about
the supplied fuse holder - Purchase Order No.R-6357M/3832
In regards to our previous discussion and meeting Iam hereby providing
you with the requested details of the material supplied. The other
documents of DC copy, datasheet, COC etc., are available with the purchase
department .
RUSSIA fuse holder
Fuse : 4x15mmRated
Load : 5A 250V ACContact
Resistance : ≤10mΩ
Insulation Resistance: ≥1KΩ
Withstand Voltage: AC1500V(50HZ)/Min
Frame & Cap : PBT
Terminal : Tin plated brass
As can be seen
the frame and cap is mentioned to be of the material make of "PBT" ie., Polybutylene
Terephthalate (PBT) which is a flame retardant .. Attached is a
document for your kind information and understanding of the PBT material and its properties
allowing you to judge for its suitability for your requirement. In the positive
acceptance of the material by yourselves we shall propose and accept for
providing you with the metallic nuts as per the need of the end customer as
suggested by you. Hereby you are requested to kindly respond with your decision
allowing us to go further in supporting RPD-ECIL without further delay.
For the kind attention of respected Balachandran sir, Head incharge RPD
Division, ECIL
Respected
sir
Greetings
In regards to our conversation this afternoon firstly I would thank you
for listening to me and appreciate you cum very much thankful for your
knowledge and understanding of the different kinds of Polymers upon which we
discussed ,.. As you rightly mentioned that Bakelite is not the material that's
supposed to be used in your Electrical requirement products because of its
higher moisture absorption characteristic & AG4 is a combination of certain
% of Glass reinforced plastic which is SP16 equivalent , you can see the
forwarded mail copied here below that the same has been mentioned to purchase
department yesterday.
The reason for writing to purchase incharge was considering that Iam not
supposed to disturb the indentor or the project head once the PO is released ,
thus following the protocol I wanted to communicate to the technical department
through purchase department. But however I have received a mail directly
from the indentor asking for the clarification on the material supplied for
which my explanation was given in response which has been forwarded to you and
can be seen below.
As discussed and accepted by you about the "OTK"
standard to be considered as Russian Mil-standard, you can see that OTK
certification is provided on the OEM certificate. For the understanding of ECIL
the concerned Russian certificate has been translated to English and provided.
When I received a mail from ECIL for explanation or
clarification I have given the clarification from my end in response. Then
whats wrong that I have done. Whys is an issue being created. I oblige Anil sir
for his proper behavior till date. But I couldn't explain to the subordinates
or others that may it be Bakelite or Polyester or AG4 or SP16 etc., all the
Polymers only. I should thank you for accepting the term "reinforced
plastic" .. The hydro carbon compound structure formed with any other
material getting moulded as our need and being Mil-grade is what required ultimately
by ECIL. In such a scenario my supplier's response from Russia is that Bakelite
is not used any more and in case of requirement for defence purpose its a new
compound used whose chemical structure will not be revealed but is certified to
be Russian MIL-Grade for sure and is asking you to test as per your standards
and verify if its meeting the required military standard or not .. Upon the
other aspect or issue of metallic nut its mentioned that they had complaints
from India in the past and even from ECIL itself that some Black colour is
being formed at the contact of the metal and the fuse holder.. it might be
because of some rusting or whatever reaction. Thus it was provided in such
fashion with necessary required compound make to avoid future chemical reactions
and or to avoid change of colour. And that's what was the picture shown in the
datasheet provided by me.
A confusion environment is happening at ECIL on to go for
either a Polyamide or Polymer or a PBT compound or FRP or SP or Bakelite
or to avoid Plastic or can accept Thermoset plastic.. The purpose of
mentioning this to you is to make you understand the scenario since it has not
reached to you till date.. However Iam happy that you have the clarity of each
of this basic compound and can differentiate them or understand what are of the
same make and fall under which category. Others are just going on with trade
names.
"
I would say that AG4 is a Staramide, which is a water insoluble, odorless polyamide (PA) 66 grade
reinforced with 20% glass fiber . On one side they are blaming that
material might be having Nylon and Nylon should not be used and on the other
hand asking for AG4 which is having PA66 and I hope you know that PA66 is
nothing but Nylon. Polybutylene Terephthalate - with 30 % Glass Fiber
Reinforcement, would be Flame Retardant . so don't you think that might be
better option in one way. Ultimately hope you shall agree
that end of the day whatever the combination is used if its a saturated polymer
the internal bonding is high and thus the Strength will be
high.
Similarly
if Graphene fiber reinforced plastic is achieved that would the best option
which can be enquired from ARCI, Hyderabad.
Iam mentioning all these points in the benefit of ECIL to avoid
such confused ecosystem or issues in future for any other vendors though I may
not get any enquiries/orders in future and may not be the future vendor or
supplier..I respect purchase department for their proper response at all times.
I should thank Anil sir aswell for his proper initiation but the issue is
happening at various levels due to communication gap and ego problem to take
the knowledge or information from the opposite.
In regards to the current issue the OEM is sending a certificate of
confirmation of the material to be of MILITARY GRADE in response to my query on
behalf of ECIL. That's the assurance that I can give apart from the Bank
gurantee cum security deposit that has already been submitted to purchase
department of RPD.
Finally
I'll take with a note of thanks for your time, support and guidance .. I thank
you for your final humble words and giving me assurance to look into the issue
and resolve it.
Thanking
you
Best
regards
Prashant.G
Rajarajeshwari
Business Consultants.
----------
Forwarded message ---------
From: Prassannt Garekaphate <mktg.rrbc@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 10:42 AM
Subject: Fwd: Information to maintain the clarity of conversation in regards to the Fuse holders material make
To: <padmalatha_gg@ecil.co.in>
From: Prassannt Garekaphate <mktg.rrbc@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 10:42 AM
Subject: Fwd: Information to maintain the clarity of conversation in regards to the Fuse holders material make
To: <padmalatha_gg@ecil.co.in>
Respected
madam
Greetings
In
regards to my recent mail in response to the mail from RPD asking for
clarification on the material supplied Iam hereby providing you the details for
your information and database considering you to be the purchase incharge.
·
""AG4 is a 20% Glass Fiber Reinforced
Polyamide 66 Injection Molding Resin """ This info was
not provided to me neither by the DGM or the indenter in the enquiry nor in the
purchase order.
·
PBT compounds being flame redundant , A series of glass fiber
reinforced, flame retardant PBT compounds which has a melting temperature of
more than 200 degree celsius might be a better option. A sample sheet
of the PBT material is attached for your reference.
·
Bakelite being considered as some hardest material in your
conversations I would like to inform that its nothing but a plastic.
You can see
that on one hand RPD technical team is verbally asking for AG4 material, the
subordinate is talking of Bakelite & the indentor is not confirmed with the
exact material required. Out of my research I have done concerned enquiry and
informing you about the information to avoid future confusions. ie., you
can verify from your Chemical department scientists or from the Lab whrein the
material is sent for testing and get the confirmation of the exact material
required out of SP, AG4, PBT, Plastic, Bakelite or Polymer. A sample datasheet
of PBT material is attached for your reference and understanding.
This
is to give you a picture and vision of whats happening in true and how the
vendor is being treated in a stubborn fashion. With such sort of not having a
clarity for your self of whats exactly is required for your or needed for the
your end customer how can you simply blame the vendor that that he is supply is
not correct and that too your blame is without even doing the QC testing or
initiation of any other test requirement.. Just looking at the colour how can
you judge it to be worst.. It might be a better product than what you
have..
FInally I'll take leave with a note of thanks for your time
, support and hope that you shall consider my mail in positive sense so that we
can work together to provide a better solution to the End user and thereby gain
good name cum good business.
Looking
forward for your response
Thanking
you in advance
Best regards
Prashant
LSPC Mansion,
H.No: 3-201, HIG,
Lane Opposite Lakshmi SBI Homes,
HUDA, Mayuri Nagar, Miyapur,
Hyderabad - 500049
Telangana, INDIA.
Lane Opposite Lakshmi SBI Homes,
HUDA, Mayuri Nagar, Miyapur,
Hyderabad - 500049
Telangana, INDIA.
Phone::+91-8885583926
----------
Forwarded message ---------
From: Prassannt Garekaphate <mktg.rrbc@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 10:53 PM
Subject: Re: Confirmation of Material Supply and submission of datasheet cum necessary documentation
To: soujanya <soujanyachalasani@ecil.co.in>
Cc: Sheeja Sivarajan <sheeja@ecil.co.in>, <vanil@ecil.co.in>, <padmalatha_gg@ecil.co.in>, RPD Purchase <rpdpur@ecil.co.in>, M Vijayender Reddy <RPDSTORES@ecil.co.in>, pavani Garikapati <pavaniprashantg@gmail.com>
From: Prassannt Garekaphate <mktg.rrbc@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 10:53 PM
Subject: Re: Confirmation of Material Supply and submission of datasheet cum necessary documentation
To: soujanya <soujanyachalasani@ecil.co.in>
Cc: Sheeja Sivarajan <sheeja@ecil.co.in>, <vanil@ecil.co.in>, <padmalatha_gg@ecil.co.in>, RPD Purchase <rpdpur@ecil.co.in>, M Vijayender Reddy <RPDSTORES@ecil.co.in>, pavani Garikapati <pavaniprashantg@gmail.com>
Respected
Madam
Greetings
I
acknowledge the receipt of your mail and would request you to kindly
inform me on what basis it is being declared that the supplied material is not
equivalent to the shown sample shown before placing order.
In
response to your request for providing clarification I would like to say the
following words and the further explanation will be provided.
1.
Without the confirmation from any Mechanical or Chemical testing
analysis you are not supposed to declare it to be unsuitable material for your
requirement.
2.
In case of any response or report from the testing lab wherein
the supplied sample is sent for testing, you are hereby requested to verify if
its the chemical testing or Mechanical analysis..
3.
In case of Chemical testing to understand the make of the
material you are requested to kindly have a look at my mail to ECIL on
september 7th 2019 that has been copied here below the list of points for your
ease of reference.You can see that I have clearly asked for the required
material in writing and also mentioned that your provided sample is also
plastic.
4.
In regards to the Mechanical analysis I have provided you with
the datasheet of the material that I shall supply upon the enquiry before
placing PO . And that was in English version for your ease and convenience
though its the make of Russia. The Mechanical cum structural characteristics
can be verified in comparison with the datasheet provided.
5.
Also on December 13th 2019 mail was sent with complete details
of attachments for purchase department along with the datasheet of proposal of
supply , mentioning here for your verification.
6.
As suggested by Sheeja madam the concerned Russian Datasheet
version has been provided to you in English for your ease of testing and the
concerned document is attached.
7.
If it is the case or issue of AG4 material I hope you remember
that this discussion happened quite a few times when I asked you and you to
have enquired with the available technical members in your team but couldn't
come to a conclusion of what AG4 is nor you have confirmed from sir and
informed me in response to which only I had to send request for explanation.
This inquiry happened at purchase department aswell but didn't get any
confirmed information.
8.
The material supplied is along with the Russian OEM warranty
certificate for 15 years and with the OEM passport cum compliance certificate
of declaring the material to of MIl-Grade. The supplied certificate is
declaring the product to be OTK standard
.The explanation of the OTK is attached for your kind reference which was sent
as mail to Purchase incharge madam on the day of supply.
9.
The material that has been supplied as per OTK standard as
mentioned and stamped on the Material packing and COC which indicates that the
material supplied has been manufactured and QC certified after being tested as
per the military standards by the OEM. That's the proof for material being
supplied is of Mil-Grade standard.
10.
The concerned OEM Russian certificate snapshot has been attached
for your reference & the English translation has been provided for your
understanding.
11.
The Fuse holder datasheet provided to ECIL before placing a PO
has been attached for your cross verification and request you to kindly comment
which is the issue or aspect/parameter of the specification that you are
considering to be irrelevant or not matching with the supplied material and
which of these parameters have been tested before claiming my supply to be
improper. The document will be available in your SAP database without my access
for any manipulation. Thus being in secured database you can verify with what I
have provided during the time of tendering process.
12.
Also the production period of the material is shown to be in
2019 in the certificate which is less than 2 years as per the need of the
project requirement.
13.
As you are aware and get confirmation from purchase department
that the Bank guarantee has been provided whose snapshots were shown in
previous mail , you can think logically precise that why I shall take risk if I
don't have the confidence of supplying quality product as claimed to supply as
per my explanation given to ECIL in response to which purchase order was given.
Finally I'll
leave with a note of request for considering the material to be of Military
Grade looking at the Testing Standard stamp on certificate to be of OTK ie.,
the testing of the material supplied is done as per Military testing and
thereby request for atleast initiate the QC testing as per the datasheet
provided & thereby accepting the material for your purchase to implement in
the required project.
Upon
the receipt of the test report from the lab further explanation and discussion
can be done in regards to any device with make of - Plastic, PBT, FRP,
Bakelite, SP, Polyamide, Nylon, staramide etc., This is for the clarification
of ECIL in communication with the Vendor such that every next supply shall be
done as per the need of ECIL with vendor's self decision or ECIL has to clarify
with clear detailed info.. For example if we mentioned "fuse holder made
of Bakelite".. Bakelite is a compound structure polymer whose parent
material class is Plastic and a multiple combinations whose sample list is
attached for your reference to understand that in the process of our
transaction we need to have the clarity of what exact is expected by the end
user.
Looking
forward for your kind response
Thanking
you in advance
Best
regards
Prashant.G
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
----------
Forwarded message ---------
From: Prassannt Garekaphate <mktg.rrbc@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Sep 7, 2019 at 3:39 PM
Subject: Request for information & proposal
To: <vanil@ecil.co.in>
From: Prassannt Garekaphate <mktg.rrbc@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Sep 7, 2019 at 3:39 PM
Subject: Request for information & proposal
To: <vanil@ecil.co.in>
Respected sir
Greetings
In regards to
the recent RFQ that I have received I have seen that Switch πT3 -40B is not
mentioned which was also enquired for during our initial discussion for which
budgetary price was mentioned. This material is available for ready
dispatch and supply if required instead of waiting for 2 months ..
In regards to the Fuse Holder
please confirm with the exact material that you are expecting which I guess is
not accepted if made of Plastic, Polymer or Nylon. Also request you to
confirm with the approximate Qty such that I shall get back to you with
the price and time period for supply. The
query raised here is that sample fuse holder provided by you aswell is made of
Plastic.
For the enquiry of Fuses Iam ready with the quotation and
datasheet and shall provide to RPD purchase department on Monday ie., 9th
september the due date and shall meet you once.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
On Mon, Feb
24, 2020 at 10:43 AM soujanya <soujanyachalasani@ecil.co.in>
wrote:
Dear Sir,
With reference to the below mail, received
material is not equivalent to the samples shown by you before placing the
order. Please clarify the same as soon as possible.
Thanking You,
With Best Regards
Ch Soujanya
Technical Manager
Reactor Projects Division
Electronics Corporation Of India Limited
Hyderabad,Pin-500062
Phn-040 2718 6823/2778
With Best Regards
Ch Soujanya
Technical Manager
Reactor Projects Division
Electronics Corporation Of India Limited
Hyderabad,Pin-500062
Phn-040 2718 6823/2778
From: Prassannt
Garekaphate [mailto:mktg.rrbc@gmail.com]
Sent: 18 February 2020 19:16
To: soujanya; Sheeja Sivarajan
Cc: RPD Purchase; vanil@ecil.co.in; padmalatha_gg@ecil.co.in
Subject: Confirmation of Material Supply and submission of datasheet cum necessary documentation
Sent: 18 February 2020 19:16
To: soujanya; Sheeja Sivarajan
Cc: RPD Purchase; vanil@ecil.co.in; padmalatha_gg@ecil.co.in
Subject: Confirmation of Material Supply and submission of datasheet cum necessary documentation
Respected/mamdam
Greetings
In regards to
the Enquiry No. 759850, Purchase Order No.R-6357M/3832, I am
hereby confirming you that the concerned material has been supplied , delivered
today at the RPD stores against the DC copy no. 517209, dated 18th
February 2020.. The concerned Security Deposit & Bank Guarantee
with NO.- 748964 has been submitted in the purchase department about few
days ago in the past week.
The concerned proof of
the DC copy, Security deposit & Bank Guarantee, COC certificate for the
material supplied and snapshots of the material supplied have been
attached for your kind reference , confirmation and database.
Upon the suggestion of
Sheja madam and Padmalatha madam the datasheet of the material provided along
with the initial quotation on 13th December 2019 has been attached which
has English language explanation & prepared another document of English
Version today for your future benefit of QC activities.
Request you
to kindly see that the concerned ISRV is done soon so that QC work can be
initiated soon.
Finally I'll take leave
with a note of thanks for your kind support and time.
Looking forward for your
response
Thanking you
in advance
Best regards
Prashant
LSPC Mansion,
H.No: 3-201, HIG,
Lane Opposite Lakshmi SBI Homes,
HUDA, Mayuri Nagar, Miyapur,
Hyderabad - 500049
Telangana, INDIA.
Lane Opposite Lakshmi SBI Homes,
HUDA, Mayuri Nagar, Miyapur,
Hyderabad - 500049
Telangana, INDIA.
Phone::+91-8885583926
