Skip to website
Chitra RaqveshiChief Technology Officer
Portrait of Chitra Raqveshi

Chief Technology Officer · India

ChitraRaqveshi

The space to maintain it belongs in the design

I grew up in Madurai and studied mechanical engineering because I wanted to understand how a drawing becomes something another person can build and use.

Open to
  • Board appointments
  • Advisory roles
  • Speaking invitations
Read the profileBegin a conversation

The space to maintain it belongs in the design

In 2018 I backed a compact equipment layout without adequately examining the space needed to remove its service cassette. Hema Tezqorni questioned whether a component that could be reached could actually be taken out. I treated the access drawing as sufficient reassurance. A later review of eighteen delivered units found eleven with adequate removal provision and seven without it. I had approved a smaller footprint by leaving part of the maintenance task outside the design account.

I am Chitra Raqveshi, the fictional CTO of Jezqavthi Heat Recovery in Jamshedpur. Forty-six engineering colleagues work through four leads, with six external specialists counted separately. My ₹11.4 crore annual technology operating envelope and ₹4.6 crore laboratory and qualification capital programme are distinct from our ₹186 crore FY 2026 enterprise revenue. We design and manufacture heat-recovery equipment; we do not claim customers' generating capacity or energy savings as our own operating results.

My work concerns the technical choices that remain consequential after an attractive performance demonstration. Can a service assembly be recovered responsibly rather than automatically discarded? Does a component's acoustic evidence describe the assembled product? What can a co-developed design actually be used for later? Can an apparently efficient factory assembly reach the customer's site without creating a different engineering problem? I bring those questions into design decisions while keeping specialist assessment and site authority with the qualified owners.

Access and removal were reviewed separately

The eighteen-unit review retained seven unresolved maintenance provisions. Five later received approved revised layouts and two remained pending; approved drawings were not reported as completed site work.

Recovery needed an engineering disposition

Fourteen used, non-pressure air-side cassettes entered a bounded remanufacturing programme. Nine qualified, three were retired and two remained under review, without a claim that recovered assemblies had become new products.

The assembled product kept its own evidence

An acoustic investigation retained the difference between a fan's isolated result and the behaviour of an assembled mock-up. Further redesign improved the defined exercise while leaving one configuration unresolved.

Current focus

I am connecting equipment development to its maintenance, recovery and modification routes, so the technical proposition includes the work that continues after first delivery.

Conversations I welcome

Selected engineering-leadership discussions and a possible first outside contribution, after preparation, current-employer and relationship review.

32 years

Engineering career

June 1994–October 2026; fictional continuous appointments

46 colleagues

Engineering function

Four leads; six external specialists counted separately

₹11.4 crore

Annual technology operations

Separate ₹4.6 crore laboratory and qualification capital

320 people

Enterprise workforce

At March 2026; equipment manufacture and service

I want the design review to include the next person who has to work with the equipment. An assembly that performs today can still leave a costly problem in its maintenance access, repair route, documentation or future use. Those conditions belong in the technical proposition before they become somebody else's operating burden.

Chitra Raqveshi

Chief Technology Officer

Areas of stewardship

Where accountability has been mine.

  1. IMaintenance as a design requirement
  2. IIEngineering disposition of recovered assemblies
  3. IIIEvidence for the assembled product
  4. IVFuture use of co-developed technology

Selected work

Decisions, and what they changed.

I

I approved the compact footprint without accounting for the removal task

In 2018, as functional director of product engineering, I supported a compact heat-recovery equipment layout.

The full account

II

Keeping the unrecoverable cassettes inside the remanufacturing account

A 2022 programme examined fourteen returned, non-pressure air-side cassettes for possible remanufacture.

The full account

III

The fan's isolated result did not describe the assembled acoustic proposition

In 2023 an equipment-development proposal relied heavily on a fan's acoustic result obtained under its stated component conditions.

The full account

In the words of others

Trusted by those who appoint.

In this fictional account, Chitra retained the cost and unresolved conditions when the engineering recommendation became less convenient. Her co-development review gave the programme a narrower but supportable basis for the next application.
Feroz VezqarniFictional CEO and current manager, Jezqavthi Heat Recovery
This invented quote reflects my service-engineering relationship with Chitra. She acknowledged that the compact layout she approved had not established removal space and kept revised-layout approval separate from completed work at the affected units.
Hema TezqorniFictional service-engineering colleague, Jezqavthi Heat Recovery

The journal

Perspective, set down with care.

An invitation

Contact

Selected engineering-leadership discussions and a possible first outside contribution, after preparation, current-employer and relationship review.

Open to
  • Board appointments
  • Advisory roles
  • Speaking invitations
Write to Chitra

office@chitraraqveshi.example