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.
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.
The case presents a critical public safety dilemma where an Executive Engineer discovers serious structural deviations in a flyover construction that could compromise safety, while facing pressure from superiors to ignore the issues and complete the project on time.
Stakeholders
- Primary Stakeholders: Executive Engineer, Chief Engineer, Junior Engineers, contractor, general public using the flyover
- Secondary Stakeholders: Municipal Corporation, traffic management authorities, media, political leadership
Executive Engineer stakeholder diagram
Evaluation of Options
Option 1: Follow Chief Engineer's advice and proceed
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| - Maintains hierarchical discipline and chain of command | - Compromises public safety and violates engineering ethics |
| - Avoids immediate conflict with superior | - Potential legal liability under BNS Section 304A (negligence causing death) |
| - Ensures timely project completion | - Violates constitutional duty under Article 21 (right to life) |
Option 2: Submit exhaustive written report seeking written orders
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| - Creates documented evidence of safety concerns | - Chief Engineer may still issue written orders to proceed |
| - Transfers responsibility burden to Chief Engineer | - Delays decision-making process |
| - Follows proper administrative protocol | - May not prevent potential disaster |
| - Protects against future legal consequences | - Could strain working relationship |
Option 3: Direct action with Junior Engineers and contractor
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| - Addresses root cause through accountability measures | - Exceeds authority by overruling Chief Engineer |
| - Ensures immediate corrective action | - May face disciplinary action for insubordination |
| - Demonstrates leadership and responsibility | - Could create administrative chaos |
Option 4: Escalate to higher authorities
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| - Ensures proper technical review by competent authority | - Violates chain of command principles |
| - Protects public interest over bureaucratic pressure | - May damage career prospects permanently |
| - Aligns with constitutional values and engineering ethics | - Could be perceived as whistleblowing |
| - Prevents potential catastrophic failure | - May face retaliation from Chief Engineer |
Option 5: Seek transfer or report sick
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| - Avoids personal conflict and career damage | - Abandons professional and moral responsibility |
| - Removes personal liability from situation | - Allows potential public safety disaster |
| - Preserves future career opportunities | - Violates civil service ethics and oath |
Recommended Course of Action
I would adopt Option 2 followed by Option 4 - first documenting concerns through written report, and if Chief Engineer still orders to proceed, escalating to higher authorities. This approach balances administrative propriety with public safety imperatives, ensuring both procedural compliance and ethical responsibility as mandated by civil service conduct rules.
"The ultimate measure of a person is not where they stand in moments of comfort, but where they stand at times of challenge and controversy."
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
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.
Model Answers by Subject
Crack UPSC with your
Personal AI Mentor
An AI-powered ecosystem to learn, practice, and evaluate with discipline
