Case Study You work in a government office, and due to your expertise and trustworthiness, you have been selected to serve on election duty. Your role involves ensuring a fair and transparent electoral process by overseeing the polling station operations, maintaining the voting machines, and monitoring the conduct of election officials. During the election, you observe a fellow election official who happens to be your good friend engaging in misconduct. The official is manipulating the voting process by favouring a particular political party, allowing unauthorized individuals to vote multiple times, and suppressing votes from certain demographics. You are aware that the actions of this official compromise the integrity of the election and violate the principles of fairness and impartiality. How do you balance your duty to the election process with potential personal consequences?

Case Study Ananya Rao, an IPS officer serving as Deputy Commissioner of Police (Cyber & Internal Security), is deeply troubled by intelligence inputs indicating a sharp rise in white-collar terrorism driven by the radicalisation of highly educated youth. Several recent incidents highlight this trend: engineering graduates developing encrypted communication tools for a banned extremist network, a finance professional funnelling cryptocurrency to foreign terror groups, and university students circulating extremist literature under the defence of intellectual debate. Although strong digital evidence implicates certain tech entrepreneurs, academics, and online influencers in facilitating these activities, Ananya’s proposal for targeted surveillance, deplatforming recruiters, and initiating UAPA-based action faces intense criticism. Civil society groups accuse her of suppressing free speech and violating privacy norms. Influential educational institutions lobby political leadership to avoid “unnecessary scandal.” Media debates portray the crackdown as ideological policing rather than a national security imperative. Parents of the accused youth argue for leniency on the grounds of immaturity. At the same time, central intelligence agencies warn that inaction may enable the growth of a covert terror ecosystem capable of cyber sabotage, financial crimes, and ideological infiltration of campuses. Ananya is torn between protecting civil liberties and addressing an urgent security threat. Her decision carries the risks of public controversy, political backlash, and potential legal challenges, but delaying action could compromise public safety and embolden extremist networks. Questions: A. What are the key ethical dilemmas faced by Ananya Rao in this situation? B. Identify and analyse the conflicting values and ethical principles involved in this case. C. Evaluate the possible courses of action available to Ananya and their likely consequences. D. Suggest the most ethical and administratively prudent course of action that balances civil liberties with the need to counter rising radicalisation and white-collar terrorism.

Case Study Ashwani Sood is a farmer who resides in a village of moderate size in the Sitamarhi district of Bihar. He was once chosen to lead the local Panchayat. He has a 25-year-old young son Divyansh. Being the only son of the family, Divyansh was pampered and became spoilt. He was arrogant, always wanted to have his way and would pick up a fight at the slightest opportunity. A primary school teacher of the area was shot in the head by Divyansh in full view of a large number of persons. He was arrested and remained in jail, despite several attempts to come out. The MLA of the district is happened to be a part of state cabinet and is also a longtime friend of Ashwani and is currently very influential in the government. The present District Magistrate (Sanjit) has good relations with the minister as he had worked under this Minister in the secretariat before he came to this district and was also recommended by him. Later, the cabinet minister from the district called Sanjit for recommending parole to Divyansh. The Minister did not claim that Divyansh is innocent; his pleading was restricted to the circumstances the family was passing through as his mother had died recently. The Minister’s request has created a somewhat difficult situation for Sanjit. This Minister rarely intervenes in any administrative day-to-day functions. What would be the course of action should Sanjit follow and why?

Case Study You are an officer working for the fire department in a city. One day, a massive fire breaks out in a building belonging to a coaching institute having classrooms where more than 1000 students are stranded. Also, the building lacks proper fire safety measures and adequate exits. Panic ensues as students inside the building desperately try to escape the flames and smoke, resulting in some individuals resorting to jumping off the building to save themselves. As you arrive at the scene, you are faced with the following dilemmas: (a) How do you prioritize the rescue operations, given the limited resources and time available? (b) How do you deal with the ethical and legal implications of the building owner’s negligence and violation of fire safety norms? (c) How do you handle the emotional and psychological impact of witnessing such a tragic incident on yourself and your team members?

Case Studies Q. You are posted as the General Manager of a large public sector manufacturing unit. Recently, tensions have escalated between the management and the workers’ union. The union has raised demands regarding increased wages, better safety standards, and permanent absorption of contractual workers. While some of their demands are legitimate and align with labour welfare norms, others may have a severe impact on the company's financial health. Moreover, you discover that a few influential union leaders are instigating workers to go on an indefinite strike, even though negotiations are still ongoing. Meanwhile, a group of junior employees approaches you confidentially, expressing concern that the aggressive approach of the union may harm their career prospects and lead to a prolonged factory shutdown. At the same time, pressure mounts from the Ministry to avoid disruptions and meet production targets crucial for national supply chains. In the midst of this, a senior union leader offers to de-escalate the situation in exchange for personal favors, such as awarding contracts to firms linked to him and ensuring his relatives receive preferential treatment in job promotions. You are expected to submit a report to the Ministry suggesting a path forward that ensures industrial peace, protects workers’ rights, and prevents unethical compromises. A. Identify and discuss the ethical issues involved in this case. B. How would you balance worker welfare with organizational sustainability and public interest? C. How should you respond to the offer made by the union leader? What mechanisms should be used to ensure transparency and accountability? D. What ethical values and principles of public administration should guide your conduct?