New Delhi, Jan. 13: The country's top military technocrat was today sacked as the head of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) after the Modi government found his outfit was unwilling or unable to fall in line with the 'Make in India' policy.

Avinash Chander, who was at the centre of the Agni series of missiles and probably the maker of the Nirbhaya missile, was removed as the director-general, DRDO; secretary, defence research and development; and the scientific adviser to the defence minister.

Chander, who was conferred an honorary degree by Jadavpur University in Calcutta last month, had superannuated in November but was re-employed by the Centre for 18 months. He was appointed to the office in the UPA II regime when A.K. Antony was defence minister.

'This is very unusual - it has never happened before,' said a senior scientist and former chief controller of research in the DRDO. 'Scientific advisers have received extensions in their service periods in the past, but no one has ever been removed after having being given an extension,' the scientist who requested not to be named told The Telegraph.

Chander built his career on his contribution to India's missile development programme that began with A.P.J. Abdul Kalam. A department in Jadavpur University's Faculty of Engineering and Technology housed 'Project Jupiter' that was understood to have been a participant in the avionics and sensors that went into projects under the now scrapped Integrated Guided Missile Development Programme (IGMDP).

A government notification today said Chander's contract would be terminated from January 31 with the approval of the appointments committee of the cabinet, headed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Chander was removed just a month and a half into his contract.

Last month, Prime Minister Modi had said that the 'laid back' attitude in the DRDO - where projects have fallen behind schedule for years - was of serious concern. The armed forces had been complaining that the DRDO rarely produces equipment that could be used in battle conditions.

Private sector firms interested in defence manufacturing had also been complaining that the DRDO did not give permits easily. But from within the DRDO, the consistent argument was that it was developing equipment in the teeth of opposition from global arms majors who do not want India to have its own capacity to make arms and weapons systems.