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 You are the Municipal Commissioner of a metropolitan city. During a routine audit, you discover that a high-profile urban infrastructure project, a flyover designed to ease traffic congestion in a low-income area, is being constructed using substandard materials. The contractor is a major donor to the ruling political party, and the irregularities were seemingly overlooked by senior engineers in your department. If the project continues, there is a significant risk of structural failure in the future, endangering thousands of lives. If you halt the project to initiate a formal investigation, you will face immense political pressure, potential suspension, and the stalling of a project that is already years behind schedule. Additionally, the lead engineer on the project, a senior official nearing retirement, approaches you privately, begging you to look the other way, citing that the "small" compromise was necessary to keep the project viable amid budget constraints. In this context, answer the following: 1. Identify the ethical conflicts in this scenario. 2. Evaluate the options available to you as the Municipal Commissioner. 3. What is your immediate and long-term course of action? Justify your decisions, keeping in mind the principles of administrative integrity and public safety.
Case Study Arun Mehta, an IAS officer serving as the Municipal Commissioner of a rapidly urbanising metropolitan city, is deeply concerned about the alarming rise in deaths and respiratory illnesses linked to deteriorating air quality. Recent reports from the State Pollution Control Board and a reputed medical institute reveal that particulate matter (PM2.5) levels are consistently 4–5 times higher than permissible limits, with a sharp increase in lung diseases among children and the elderly. Despite these warnings, several influential construction firms and transport unions continue to flout dust control, emission, and waste disposal norms. When Arun proposes stricter enforcement and temporary shutdowns of polluting construction sites, he faces severe resistance from local politicians and business lobbies, who argue that such actions would “hurt development and employment.” Some media outlets label his measures as “anti-growth.” Environmental NGOs and citizen groups urge immediate action, citing the constitutional right to a healthy environment under Article 21. At the same time, municipal employees complain of inadequate protective gear and poor coordination among departments. The state government, fearing public outrage, forms a committee to “study the issue,” delaying concrete action. Arun must now decide whether to take strong punitive measures against violators and enforce pollution control norms strictly, or adopt a gradual approach to avoid confrontation with vested interests and political backlash. His decision will test his administrative courage, ethical conviction, and sense of duty toward public welfare. Questions: 1. What are the key ethical dilemmas faced by Arun Mehta in this situation? 2. Identify and analyse the conflicting values and principles involved in this case. 3. Evaluate the possible courses of action available to Arun and their likely consequences. 4. Suggest the most ethical and administratively sound course of action that balances environmental protection with developmental needs.