ClearMains
10 marks · 150 words
Practice this question
Handwrite your answer the way you would in the real exam, photograph it, and get AI-graded, rubric-based feedback — scores per dimension, strengths, gaps, and what a topper would add.
Handwrite it, get it evaluated →Want the full paper experience instead? Assemble a timed practice paper from the full GS4 question bank.
More on GS4 · Case Studies
Case Study Mr. Aditya Sharma is serving as the District Magistrate of a rapidly growing district where the state government has recently introduced an AI-based system to identify beneficiaries for welfare schemes such as housing subsidies, scholarships, and pension benefits. The system uses multiple datasets—income records, property ownership, electricity consumption, and bank transactions—to automatically generate a list of eligible beneficiaries. The government promotes the system as a major reform to improve efficiency, reduce corruption, and ensure objective targeting of welfare benefits. Initially, the new system significantly reduces manual processing and speeds up the delivery of benefits. However, during public grievance hearings, Mr. Sharma begins receiving numerous complaints from genuinely poor families who have been excluded from the beneficiary list. Upon investigation, he discovers that the algorithm relies heavily on digital and financial data. As a result, many informal-sector workers, migrant families, and people without regular digital footprints are being wrongly classified as “ineligible.” At the same time, some relatively well-off households with incomplete or outdated records have been included in the beneficiary list. Civil society organisations accuse the administration of creating “digital exclusion”, arguing that excessive reliance on automated decision-making ignores ground realities. When Mr. Sharma raises these concerns with higher authorities, he is advised to continue using the system because it is a flagship governance reform that demonstrates the government's commitment to transparency and technology-driven administration. Officials argue that questioning the system may undermine public confidence in digital governance. Meanwhile, media reports and social activists are increasingly highlighting cases of exclusion, portraying the administration as insensitive to the needs of vulnerable populations. Mr. Sharma must decide how to address these concerns while balancing technological efficiency, fairness, and accountability in welfare delivery. Questions 1. Identify the ethical issues involved in the above case. 2. What options are available to Mr. Sharma? Evaluate the merits and demerits of each option. 3. What course of action should Mr. Sharma adopt to ensure both administrative efficiency and ethical governance? Justify your answer.
Case Study: As an Airworthiness Officer with the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), you have been assigned to conduct a post-crash safety audit following a tragic incident involving a major airline. A commercial aircraft operated by the airline crashed, resulting in fatalities, civilian property damage, and significant public concern over the safety of air travel. During your audit, you uncover alarming issues with the airline's operations. These include recurring technical faults in the fleet, such as flight control irregularities, as well as incomplete and inconsistent maintenance logs. Despite multiple complaints from crew members over the years, these concerns were neither properly addressed nor escalated by the airline’s management. Additionally, you find that the airline has inadequately maintained crew training records, casting doubt on the airline’s compliance with International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) safety standards. A crew member further alleges that the crashed aircraft had known mechanical issues and that staff complaints had been ignored for an extended period. The airline is part of a well-connected and influential business group, with a strong public image. A senior executive from the airline downplays the severity of the issues, insisting they are minor and will be resolved. Furthermore, your superior has informally advised you to tread lightly, suggesting that highlighting these problems could harm national morale and cause a political backlash. You are now faced with a difficult decision: should you file a thorough and detailed report of your findings, which could potentially trigger urgent reforms in the airline’s operations but may provoke political and personal risk? Alternatively, should you withhold certain findings to avoid causing harm to the airline’s reputation and national sentiment, despite the potential risks to public safety? Questions: (a) What are the key ethical issues present in this case? Highlight the conflicting duties and interests affecting your judgment. (b) What are the options available to you? Discuss the merits and demerits of each. (c) Which option would you choose and why? Justify your decision using relevant ethical principles and the responsibilities of a regulatory authority during a crisis.