Government tech fund goes to private firms linked to panel that selected them

A new public fund to boost India’s deep-tech ambitions in the private sector has approved, in its first round, Rs 2,192 crore in soft loans to 22 private companies at the cutting edge of space science, energy tech and pharma, among others. These companies were chosen from 124 applicants by a 12-member panel, including 11 established names in private equity and technology, and a non-voting government representative. The credentials of each company are well-established. There’s one question mark, though. An investigation by The Indian Express has found that of the 22 recipients of public money, 15 have investment ties to seven members of the selection committee, raising questions of conflict of interest and propriety. These together got over Rs 1,377 crore. Nine of the firms are linked to the chairman of the selection panel, the founder of an angel investing network who also has a personal stake in at least one of the companies selected. These members are part of the Investment Committee of the Technology Development Board (TDB), one of the two organisations under the Ministry of Science and Technology entrusted with picking firms for the Rs 1-lakh-crore Research, Development and Innovation (RDI) Fund launched in November 2025. When contacted, the seven panel members denied any impropriety and said the fund's guidelines forbid them from participating in the evaluation process in situations of conflict of interest. They said they had communicated their interests to the Government in advance and, as required under the guidelines, recused themselves from decisions concerning firms linked to them. However, this issue was flagged in Parliament by Congress Rajya Sabha MP Praveen Chakravarty. In a written reply submitted on July 30, Science and Technology Minister Jitendra Singh listed the names of the seven members who had disclosed financial interest in companies selected for funding. Since it was not specifically asked, the Union Minister's reply did not detail the nature or extent of their investments. The next day, the Department of Science and Technology clarified that the selections were done “purely on merit” and that there was “zero involvement of any conflicted members during the evaluation or sanction process of concerned proposals”. Speaking to The Indian Express, Chakravarty suggested that “perhaps, the committee to fund R&D in deep tech can comprise mainly of scientists, academics and others with no for-profit indulgences”. “Commercial viability and financial evaluation can always be received from experts external to the committee,” the MP said, adding that “the optics is as important as the intent”. Consider the findings from Registrar of Companies (RoC) and Parliament records, and information posted on official company websites about the selection committee members, and the selected firms linked to them: 1. Saurabh Srivastava, former chairman of NASSCOM (National Association of Software and Service Companies) & IVCA (Indian Venture and Alternate Capital Association), and co-founder of Indian Angel Network (IAN) Group, an investment firm. Srivastava chairs the 12-member Investment Committee (IC) of the TDB. RoC records and IAN's website show he is linked to most number of companies on the list, with a personal stake of 0.75 per cent in Noccarc Robotics, Pune, for which Rs 11.41 crore was approved from the RDI Fund. Consider this: Noccarc Robotics, Pune: Funded initially and later by IAN Group; VISTRA ITCL (India), a trustee for IAN Fund, holds 44.05% stake; Srivastava is a director in Noccarc and has a personal stake of 0.75% in the company. Explained | Explained: Who gets India's Rs 1-lakh-crore deep-tech fund, and how EndureAir Systems, Noida (RDI Fund Rs 30.01 cr): 2.35% held by Foundation for Innovation & Research in Science & Technology (FIRST), IIT-Kanpur, as of March 2025; Srivastava is a director in FIRST. Also funded by IAN Fund. BigEndian Semiconductors, Bengaluru (RDI Fund Rs 130 cr): IAN Fund. e-TRNL Energy, Mumbai (RDI Fund Rs 94 cr): IAN Fund. Dhruva Space, Hyderabad (RDI Fund Rs 105 cr): IAN; Srivastava holds one preference share. Astrome Technologies, Bengaluru (RDI Fund Rs 64.05 cr): IAN Group holds 1,501 shares through Vistra ITCL and IAN Services as of November 2025. Peptris Technologies, Bengaluru (RDI Fund Rs 86 cr): IAN Fund. Serigen Mediproducts, Pune (RDI Fund Rs 20 cr): IAN (5 preference shares); IAN Alpha Fund (1,004 preference shares). Manastu Space Technologies, Thane (RDI Fund Rs 116 cr): IAN Services (67 preference shares). “The IC (Investment Committee) comprises professionals from industry with a background in technology and investing.In such a situation, conflict of interest is not unexpected, not so much from IC members having invested in a company but from investments made by Funds where they are members. In all such cases, the rules are very clear: the concerned IC member must recuse himself/ herself. This is recorded in the meetings,” Srivastava said. 2. K R S Jamwal, who retired this year as Executive Director of Tata Industries, has links to seven of the selected companies. RoC records show they include: Tejas Networks, Bengaluru (RDI Fund Rs 250 cr): A Tata Group company. Jamwal was Executive Director of Tata Industries till June 2026. Manastu Space Technologies, Thane (RDI Fund Rs 116 cr): 67 preference shares. ThinkMetal, Chennai (RDI Fund Rs 6.7 cr): 53 preference shares. Parliament records show Jamwal has also disclosed interests in EndureAir Systems, BigEndian Semiconductors, Peptris Technologies and Noccarc Robotics. “I even recused myself from the Tejas Networks evaluation meeting and decision as I was then ED, Tata Industries, even though no financial stakes were involved either in my personal or professional capacities,” Jamwal said 3. Gopal Srinivasan, Chairman and Managing Director, TVS Capital Funds, holds 33 preference shares in Chennai-based Agnikul Cosmos, which was picked for Rs 200 crore under the RDI Fund. “The rules on this are pretty elaborate and stringent. Members not just have to disclose their interests in companies that have applied for funding, but even in their rival companies - standards that are above and beyond typical ICs in the industry,” Srinivasan said. 4. Sudhir Mehta, Founder and Chairman, Pinnacle Industries and EKA Mobility, disclosed interests in Pune-based Replus Engitech (RDI Fund Rs 42.75 cr). “These kinds of conflict of interest situations are not unusual. We encounter these all the time, in banks, corporate world or financial institutions. The standard procedure in such situations is full disclosure and mandatory recusal. This is what has happened in the case of RDI Fund as well. Transparency is important,” Mehta said. 5. Sanjay Nayak is co-founder and former CEO of Bengaluru-based Tejas Networks (RDI Fund Rs 250 cr), and an independent director on the board of Bengaluru-based Ather Energy (RDI Fund Rs 211.89 cr). “The best people in the deep-tech ecosystem would obviously be connected to this ecosystem.There are adequate safeguards, adequate protection for public money, at the same time it (the fund) is focused on creation of a strong deep-tech ecosystem,” Nayak said. 6. Anand Deshpande, Chairman, Persistent Systems, holds 65 preference shares in Pune-based Serigen Mediproducts (RDI Fund Rs 20 cr). “There is no perfect system. But very clean processes have already been put in place. All of us understand conflicts of interest, and everyone is extremely conscious of this,” Deshpande said. 7. Debashish Bhattacharjee, former Vice President (Technology and R&D), Tata Steel, and Managing Partner, Lionstead Ventures, has disclosed interests in Hyderabad-based NeoSeeker Metals (RDI Fund Rs 10 cr), Parliament records show. “As far as conflict of interest is concerned, I think it is important to ensure that the process is not just fair but is also seen to be fair. And I think that the detailed guidelines on this that have been put in place, and which are followed strictly in letter and spirit, do take care of this aspect,” Bhattacharjee said. Rajya Sabha MP Chakravarty said: “I am not casting any aspersions on anyone, and I am not saying some wrongdoing has happened here. My only concern is institutional robustness. I fully back the idea of the Government having to fund R&D in cutting edge tech. This is not a financial investment programme but a strategic public goods initiative using public money. So it is extremely important to get the processes right.” According to Chakravarty, “conflict of interest situations arise pretty often, and are dealt with through disclosure and recusal” in the corporate world. “But there has to be a distinction between the corporate world and public money. Dealing with public money requires additional set of guardrails. What is adequate for corporate world may not be good enough for public policy. An initiative like this should not only conform to the highest levels of transparency but seen to be conforming too,” he said. The seven remaining private firms with no links to the investment committee are: Eyestem Research, Bengaluru (RDI Fund Rs 125 crore); Ubifly Technologies, Mumbai (RDI Fund Rs 285 crore); QuNu Labs, Bengaluru (RDI Fund Rs 150 crore); Galaxeye Space Solutions, Chennai (RDI Fund Rs 63.84 crore); Multi Nano Sense Technologies, Bengaluru (RDI Fund Rs 37.51 crore); ideaForge Technology, Thane (RDI Fund Rs 151 crore); Endimension Technology, Mumbai (RDI Fund Rs 3 crore). The other members of the TDB committee are: Lalithesh Katragadda, Founder, Indihood Swarja Lab and co-founder Avanti Finance; Bala C Deshpande, Founder Partner of MegaDelta Capital; Jaswinder Ahuja, Former Corporate VP and India MD, Cadence Design Systems; Sudhir Sethi, Chairman, Chiratae Ventures; Secretary, Technology Board (ex-officio, non-voting). *** Key Takeaways 1 India’s new deep tech innovation fund gave Rs 2,192 crore to 22 firms in its first round, covering space tech, energy and pharma sectors. 2 Indian Express found 15 of 22 recipients have investment ties to seven selection panel members, totalling over Rs 1,377 crore. 3 Panel chairman Saurabh Srivastava, an angel investor, is linked to nine funded firms, including a personal stake in Noccarc Robotics. 4 Government says selections were “purely on merit” with zero conflicted-member involvement in evaluation or sanction decisions. 5 Congress MP Praveen Chakravarty’s parliamentary query prompted the minister to name the seven members with disclosed interests. 6 Panelists, including those from Tata, TVS Capital and Persistent Systems, defend the process, citing mandatory disclosure and recusal rules. *** Detailed responses from the 7 Investment Committee members who spoke to The Indian Express: Saurabh Srivastava, former chairman of NASSCOM & IVCA; co-founder, Indian Angel Network: “The RDI Fund is a very novel, innovative and unique idea in our ecosystem. The 12- member IC comprises professionals from industry with a background in technology and investing. It includes highly respected and marquee members. There are no voting Government members on the IC. In such a situation, conflict of interest is not unexpected, not so much from IC members having invested in a company but from investments made by Funds where they are a member. In all such cases, the rules are very clear: the concerned IC member must recuse himself This is recorded in the meetings. To make the process of decision-making more rigorous, it was decided that investments will be made by super majority, not majority alone. "So, if there are only nine members evaluating a project, at least six, (not just five), would have to give their approval. These are additional safeguards that ensure that there is complete fair play, and only the best projects get selected.” K R S Jamwal, former executive director, Tata Industries: “An investment committee composed of industry experts will inevitably have interests in the industry - that is precisely why they were chosen. All 11 voting members are seasoned professionals who are either builders or know how to identify and back the right builders or ventures. I, personally, have small angel investments in over 100 startups. My standard practice, and the practice followed by the whole IC, is complete recusal from funding decisions involving any entity in which I hold even a small angel investment. The TDB Investment Committee's conflict of interest policy is explicit on this, and may, in fact, be stricter than what the RDI guidelines require. It is followed strictly. This fund is a bold idea and a potential game-changer for Indian deep-tech. Let us see how successful this experiment proves to be, and how it evolves over time. “Incidentally, I somewhat expected questions at some stage, so I even recused myself from the Tejas Networks evaluation meeting and decision as I was then ED, Tata Industries, even though no financial stakes were involved either in my personal or professional capacities.” Gopal Srinivasan, chairman and managing director, TVS Capitals Fund: “I think this is a fair question to ask. And it is good that this is being discussed in the public domain. The whole purpose of the RDI fund is to enable access to long-term risk capital to companies engaged in novel and promising technology development, ideally strategic for sovereign ownership. And there is very active private participation in this process. In fact, the suggestion for establishing the RDI fund had also come from the private sector to fulfil some financing gaps. “The Investment Committee of the TDB, which is the first second-level fund manager, comprises only private sector experts and professionals. And this was a deliberate decision. The idea was that these senior professionals, who have first-hand experience of the technologies being developed, would be in a better position to identify the promising projects in nascent areas, and support them with necessary funds - funds that will be matched from any other sources for 2x impact. “I don't think there is any other government structure in which private sector plays such an active role. Because of this, it was very well understood that we would run into conflict of interest situations. Because it is still a relatively small ecosystem, and many of the members have been operating in these sectors for decades. “What was, therefore, required was a stringent set of rules on how to deal with such conflict of interest situations. And I can confidently say that the rules on this are pretty elaborate and stringent. Members not just have to disclose their interests in companies that have applied for funding, but even in their rival companies - standards that are above and beyond typical ICs in the industry. Members have to mandatorily recuse themselves from the entire process of evaluation of companies in which they, or their immediate families, or their funds, have any interest in. And this rule has been applied fairly strictly, not just in letter, but also in spirit, in every case.” Sudhir Mehta, founder and chairman, Pinnacle Industries and EKA Mobility: “These kinds of conflict of interest situations are not unusual. We encounter these all the time, in banks, corporate world or financial institutions. A member of the governing board of a bank, for example, would face a situation when a company they have investments in applies for a loan. The standard procedure in such situations is full disclosure and mandatory recusal. This is what has happened in the case of RDI Fund as well. Transparency is important. Sanjay Nayak, co-founder and former CEO, Tejas Networks: “I think the system that has been put in place adequately takes care of concerns on conflict of interest. Just because someone has investments in some specific companies should not become a reason for keeping them out of the selection panel. "The best people in the deep-tech ecosystem would obviously be connected to this ecosystem. It is precisely this attribute that makes them a good choice for the investment committee. The RDI Fund is a big leap of faith by the government, the boldest initiative in the last 25 years. It has a good, flexible approach to selection of companies. There are adequate safeguards, adequate protection for public money, at the same time it is focused on creation of a strong deep-tech ecosystem. "Faster decision-making is extremely important. The more time we are losing as a country, the further behind in technology we are slipping. We don’t want our companies to lag behind for want of capital.” Anand Deshpande, chairman, Persistent Systems: “The deep-tech ecosystem in India is very small. If we want experienced people from this ecosystem for the selection panel, it would be very difficult to find someone who is not actively investing in the ecosystem. I believe there are sufficient safeguards in the system to prevent conflict of interest kind of situations. The companies that we own, or those in which we have any operational role, are not even eligible to apply for this fund. This was decided at the very beginning. “I don't think anyone in the selection panel is here for themselves. Participating in these activities is a serious time commitment. The RDI Fund serves a very specific purpose and caters to a very genuine demand, for which the investment committee was constituted in this manner. The deep-tech ecosystem is extremely critical, but also has a high risk. These are not very straightforward businesses. It is difficult even for fairly reputed names in this sector to raise money from the market. Funding by the RDI Fund might make things a little easier for them, but it is still a difficult journey ahead of them. “Even if the selected technology does not turn out to be a success, the ecosystem that is getting built in the process would be invaluable for the Indian industry and innovation ecosystem. There is no perfect system. But very clean processes have already been put in place. All of us understand conflicts of interest, and everyone is extremely conscious of this. Debashish Bhattacharjee, former Vice President (Technology and R&D), Tata Steel, and Managing Partner, Lionstead Ventures: “The purpose of the RDI Fund is to identify and support promising deep technologies related to propulsion, engines, batteries, robots, drones, new materials, bio-technology etc that need patient capital and domain knowledge. These are likely to not just be market successes but also help India realise its industrial and technological potential. The people who have been put in charge of selecting these technologies have been doing this for decades from the technology or commercial sides, or both. Sometimes, they have failed. But those failures actually improve their experience and instincts. Having such people to do the selection maximises the chances of the RDI Fund money going to the right companies. There might be some failures here too, but that's the bet you take. The chances of success are greater. "RDIF, through its funding mechanism, is creating a unique innovation ecosystem for India that encourages private funding into high-risk new technologies. “As far as conflict of interest is concerned, I think it is important to ensure that the process is not just fair but is also seen to be fair. And I think that the detailed guidelines on this that have been put in place, and which are followed strictly in letter and spirit, do take care of this aspect.”