A Public Information Officer has received an application under the RTI Act. Having gathered the information, the PIO discovers that the information pertains to some of the decisions taken by him, which were found to be not altogether right. There were other employees also who party to these decisions were. Disclosure of the information is likely to lead to disciplinary action with the possibility of punishment against him as well as some of his colleagues. Non-disclosure or part disclosure or camouflaged disclosure of information will result in lesser punishment or no punishment. The PIO is otherwise an honest and conscientious person but this particular decision, on which the RTI application has been filed, turned out to be wrong. He comes to you for advice.
The following are some suggested options. Please evaluate the merits and demerits of each of the options:
1. The PIO could refer the matter to his superior officer seek his advice and act strictly in accordance with the advice, even though he is not completely in agreement with the advice of the superior.
2. The PIO could proceed on leave and leave the matter to be dealt with by his successor in office or request for transfer of the application to another PIO.
3. The PIO could weigh the consequences of disclosing the information truthfully, including the effect on his career, and reply in a manner that would not place him or his career in jeopardy, but at the same time, a little compromise can be made on the contents of the information.
4. The PIO could consult his other colleagues who are party to the decision and take action as per their advice.
Also please indicate (without necessarily restricting to the above options) what you would like to advise, giving proper reasons.
A Public Information Officer has received an application under the RTI Act. Having gathered the information, the PIO discovers that the information pertains to some of the decisions taken by him, which were found to be not altogether right. There were other employees also who party to these decisions were. Disclosure of the information is likely to lead to disciplinary action with the possibility of punishment against him as well as some of his colleagues. Non-disclosure or part disclosure or camouflaged disclosure of information will result in lesser punishment or no punishment. The PIO is otherwise an honest and conscientious person but this particular decision, on which the RTI application has been filed, turned out to be wrong. He comes to you for advice.
The following are some suggested options. Please evaluate the merits and demerits of each of the options:
1. The PIO could refer the matter to his superior officer seek his advice and act strictly in accordance with the advice, even though he is not completely in agreement with the advice of the superior.
2. The PIO could proceed on leave and leave the matter to be dealt with by his successor in office or request for transfer of the application to another PIO.
3. The PIO could weigh the consequences of disclosing the information truthfully, including the effect on his career, and reply in a manner that would not place him or his career in jeopardy, but at the same time, a little compromise can be made on the contents of the information.
4. The PIO could consult his other colleagues who are party to the decision and take action as per their advice.
Also please indicate (without necessarily restricting to the above options) what you would like to advise, giving proper reasons.
The case presents a conflict between transparency obligations and self-preservation where a Public Information Officer faces potential disciplinary action for disclosing information about his own questionable decisions under the RTI Act. This dilemma tests the fundamental principles of administrative accountability versus personal consequences in public service.
Stakeholders
- Primary Stakeholders: PIO, RTI applicant, colleagues involved in decisions, superior officers
- Secondary Stakeholders: Public at large, RTI system integrity, department reputation
PIO stakeholder diagram
Evaluation of Given Options
Option 1: Refer to superior officer and act on advice despite disagreement
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| - Follows hierarchical protocol and chain of command | - Abdication of personal responsibility and ethical judgment |
| - Shares accountability burden with superior authority | - May lead to institutional cover-up compromising RTI principles |
| - Maintains administrative discipline and procedural compliance | - Violates Section 4 of RTI Act requiring proactive disclosure |
| - Protects from individual blame in controversial decisions | - Creates precedent for avoiding transparency through hierarchy |
Option 2: Proceed on leave or transfer application to avoid handling
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| - Avoids direct conflict of interest situation | - Clear dereliction of statutory duty under RTI Act |
| - Prevents personal bias from affecting information disclosure | - Violates Section 7 timeline requirements causing applicant harassment |
| - Allows fresh perspective from uninvolved officer | - Sets dangerous precedent for PIOs avoiding difficult cases |
| - Maintains plausible deniability for personal protection | - May constitute misconduct under All India Services Rules |
Option 3: Compromise information content considering career implications
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| - Balances personal survival with partial transparency | - Direct violation of Section 4 and 19 of RTI Act |
| - Minimizes damage to department's public image | - Breach of oath of office and constitutional duty |
| - Protects colleagues from unnecessary career damage | - Punishable under Section 20 with penalties and prosecution |
| - Maintains some level of information sharing | - Undermines entire RTI framework and public trust |
Option 4: Consult colleagues and act per their collective advice
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| - Ensures collective responsibility for sensitive decisions | - Creates conflict of interest as colleagues are affected parties |
| - Builds consensus among stakeholders involved | - May lead to collective conspiracy to suppress information |
| - Shares burden of difficult ethical choice | - Violates independent functioning principle of RTI Act |
| - Maintains team cohesion and workplace relationships | - Compromises objectivity required for information disclosure |
Recommended Course of Action
Immediate Steps:
- Acknowledge the RTI application within prescribed timeline under Section 7
- Conduct thorough self-assessment of decisions using administrative review principles
- Document all relevant information objectively without personal bias
- Prepare complete disclosure as mandated by Article 19(1) and RTI provisions
Disclosure Strategy:
- Provide complete truthful information as required under Section 4 of RTI Act
- Include factual context explaining circumstances of original decisions
- Reference relevant administrative guidelines and procedures followed
- Maintain professional tone focusing on systemic rather than personal failures
Accountability Framework:
- Proactively inform superior about potential disciplinary implications
- Prepare detailed explanation of decision-making process for review
- Demonstrate commitment to transparency and administrative reforms
- Seek guidance on corrective measures rather than cover-up strategies
Long-term Approach:
- Use this experience to strengthen internal audit mechanisms
- Advocate for better decision-making protocols in department
- Contribute to capacity building programs for administrative excellence
- Become champion of RTI compliance and ethical governance
The path of complete transparency, despite personal costs, upholds the constitutional spirit and strengthens democratic institutions. "Truth never damages a cause that is just" - embracing accountability transforms individual challenges into systemic improvements for better governance.
Answer Length
Model answers may exceed the word limit for better clarity and depth. Use them as a guide, but always frame your final answer within the exam’s prescribed limit.
Evaluate this PYQ now
Write your answer & evaluate in just 60 seconds
500+ students evaluated
Model Answers from
- 2013Ethics: Case Study20 MarksView Answer
You are the Executive Director of an upcoming InfoTech Company that is making a name for itself in the market. Mr. A, who is a star performer, is heading the marketing team. In a short period of one year, he has helped in doubling the revenues as well as creating a high brand equity for the Company so much so that you are thinking of promoting him. However, you have been receiving information from many corners about his attitude towards the female colleagues; particularly his habit of making loose comments on women. In addition, he regularly sends indecent SMS to all the team members including his female colleagues. One day, late in the evening, Mrs. X, who is one of Mr. A’s team members, comes to you visibly disturbed. She complains about the continued misconduct of Mr. A, who has been making undesirable advances toward her and has even tried to touch her inappropriately in his cabin. She tenders her resignation and leaves your office.
a) What are the options available to you?
b) Evaluate each of these options and choose the option you would adopt, giving reasons. - 2013Ethics: Case Study20 MarksView Answer
As a senior officer in the Finance Ministry, you have access to some confidential and crucial information about policy decisions that the Government is about to announce. These decisions are likely to have far-reaching impact on the housing and construction industry. If the builders have access to this information beforehand, they can make huge profits. One of the builders has done a lot of quality work for the Government and is known to be close to your immediate superior, who asks you to disclose this information to the said builder.
a) What are the options available to you?
b) Evaluate each of these options and choose the option which you would adopt, giving reasons. - 2013Ethics: Case Study20 MarksView Answer
You are heading a leading technical institute in the country. The institute is planning to convene an interview panel shortly under your chairmanship for the selection of the post of professor. A few days before the interview, you get a call from the Personal Secretary (PS) of a senior government functionary seeking your intervention in favor of the selection of a close relative of the functionary for this post. The PS also informs you that he is aware of the long pending and urgent proposals of your institute for grant of funds for modernization, which are awaiting the functionary’s approval. He assures you that he will get these proposals cleared.
a) What are the options available to you?
b) Evaluate each of these options and choose the option which you would adopt, giving reasons. - 2013Ethics: Case Study25 MarksView Answer
Sivakasi in Tamil Nadu is known for its manufacturing clusters on firecrackers and matches. The local economy of the area is largely dependent on the firecrackers industry. It has led to tangible economic development and improved standard of living in the area. So far as child labour norms for hazardous industries like the firecrackers industry are concerned, the International Labour Organization (ILO) has set the minimum age as 18 years. In India, however, this age is 14 years. The units in industrial clusters of firecrackers can be classified into registered and non-registered entities. One typical unit is household-based work. Though the law is clear on the use of child labour employment norms in registered/non-registered units, it does not include household-based work. Household-based work means children working under the supervision of their parents/relatives. To evade child labour norms, several units project themselves as household-based works but employ children from outside. Needless to say that employing children saves the costs for these units leading to higher profits for the owners. On your visit to one of the units at Sivakasi, the owner takes you around the unit which has about 10-15 children below 14 years of age. The owner tells you that in his household-based unit, the children are all his relatives. You notice that several children smirk when the owner tells you this. On deeper enquiry, you figure out that neither the owner nor the children are able to satisfactorily establish their relationship with each other.
a) Bring out and discuss the ethical issues involved in the above case.
b) What would be your reaction after your above visit? - 2013Ethics: Case Study20 MarksView Answer
You are working as an Executive Engineer in the construction cell of a Municipal Corporation and are presently in charge of the construction of a flyover. There are two Junior Engineers under you who have the responsibility of day-to-day inspection of the site and are reporting to you, while you are finally reporting to the Chief Engineer who heads the cell. While the construction is heading towards completion, the Junior Engineers have been regularly reporting that all construction is taking place as per design specifications. However, in one of your surprise inspections, you have noticed some serious deviations and lacunae which, in your opinion, are likely to affect the safety of the flyover. Rectification of these lacunae at this stage would require a substantial amount of demolition and rework which will cause a tangible loss to the contractor and will also delay completion. There is a lot of public pressure on the Corporation to get this construction completed because of heavy traffic congestion in the area. When you brought this matter to the notice of the Chief Engineer, he advised you that in his opinion it is not a very serious lapse and may be ignored. He advised for further expediting the project for completion in time. However, you are convinced that this was a serious matter that might affect public safety and should not be left unaddressed.
What will you do in such a situation? Some of the options are given below. Evaluate the merits and demerits of each of these options and finally suggest what course of action you would like to take, giving reasons. (20 marks |250 words)
1. Follow the advice of the Chief Engineer and go ahead.
2. Make an exhaustive report of the situation bringing out all facts and analysis along with your own viewpoints stated clearly and seek for written orders from the chief Engineer.
3. Call for an explanation from the Junior Engineers and issue orders to the contractor for necessary correction within the targeted time.
4. Highlight the issue so that it reaches superiors above the Chief Engineer.
5. Considering the rigid attitude of the Chief Engineer, seek transfer from the project or report sick.
Model Answers by Subject
Crack UPSC with your
Personal AI Mentor
An AI-powered ecosystem to learn, practice, and evaluate with discipline
