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.
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.
This case presents a critical conflict between official duty and hierarchical pressure, involving potential misuse of confidential government information for private gain. The situation tests the officer's commitment to public trust and administrative integrity against loyalty to superiors and established relationships.
Stakeholders
- Primary Stakeholders: Senior Finance Ministry officer, immediate superior, builder, general public, government
- Secondary Stakeholders: Housing industry, other builders, media, anti-corruption agencies
Finance Ministry stakeholder diagram
a) Options Available
Option 1: Comply with superior's request and disclose confidential information to the builder
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| Maintains hierarchical harmony and avoids conflict with superior | Violates Official Secrets Act and service conduct rules |
| Preserves working relationship with immediate boss | Creates unfair market advantage and insider trading scenario |
| Builder's past quality work gets rewarded | Breaches public trust and constitutional oath |
| Avoids potential career repercussions from superior | Sets dangerous precedent for future information leaks |
Option 2: Refuse to disclose information and directly confront the superior about ethical concerns
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| Upholds constitutional values and service ethics | May strain relationship with immediate superior |
| Maintains integrity of policy announcement process | Potential career implications and adverse reports |
| Protects public interest and market fairness | Could create hostile work environment |
| Demonstrates moral courage and leadership | Superior might find alternative channels for information |
Option 3: Seek guidance from higher authorities or ethics committee while maintaining confidentiality
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| Follows proper institutional channels for ethical dilemmas | Time-consuming process with policy announcement pending |
| Protects both public interest and procedural compliance | May be perceived as undermining immediate superior |
| Creates documented trail of ethical decision-making | Higher authorities might not be immediately available |
b) Evaluation and Chosen Option
Chosen Option: Option 2 - Refuse disclosure while respectfully explaining ethical constraints to superior.
Reasons for Selection:
- Constitutional Duty: Article 311 protects civil servants acting in public interest
- Legal Compliance: Adheres to Prevention of Corruption Act and Official Secrets Act
- Service Ethics: Maintains integrity as per All India Services Conduct Rules
- Public Trust: Preserves market fairness and prevents insider trading equivalent scenario
Implementation Strategy:
- Respectfully explain legal and ethical constraints to superior citing specific conduct rules
- Suggest alternative ways to support quality builders through transparent processes
- Document the interaction for future reference and protection
- Maintain professional relationship while standing firm on ethical grounds
This approach balances administrative hierarchy with constitutional obligations, ensuring that public interest remains paramount while handling superior relationships diplomatically. As Mahatma Gandhi said, "Be the change you wish to see in the world" - demonstrating ethical leadership creates institutional transformation.
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.
In just 60 sec
Evaluate your handwritten answer
- Get detailed feedback
- Model Answer after evaluation
Model Answers by Subject
Crack UPSC with your
Personal AI Mentor
An AI-powered ecosystem to learn, practice, and evaluate with discipline
