UPSC MainsGENERAL-STUDIES-PAPER-IV201525 Marks250 Words

Q18.

Administrative Integrity: Addressing Vested Interests

You are heading a district administration in a particular department. Your senior officer calls you from the State Headquarters and tells you that a plot in Rampur village is to have a building constructed on it for a school. A visit is scheduled during which he will visit the site along with the chief engineer and the senior architect. He wants you to check out all the papers relating to it and to ensure that the visit is properly arranged. You examine the file which relates to the period before you joined the department. The land was acquired from the local Panchayat at a nominal cost and the papers show that clearance certificates are available from the two of the three authorities who have to certify the site's suitability. There is no certification by the architect available on file. You decide to visit Rampur to ensure that all is in order as stated on file. When you visit Rampur, you find that the plot under reference is part of Thakurgarh Fort and that the walls, ramparts, etc., are running across it. The fort is well away from the main village, therefore a school here will be a serious inconvenience for the children. However, the area near the village has potential to expand into a larger residential area. The development charges on the existing plot, at the fort, will be very high and the question of heritage site has not been addressed. Moreover, the Sarpanch, at the time of acquisition of the land, was a relative of your predecessor. The whole transaction appears to have been done with some vested interest. (a) List the likely vested interests of the concerned parties. (b) Some of the options for action available to you are listed below. Discuss the merits and demerits of each of the options : (i) You can await the visit of the superior officer and let him take a decision. (ii) You can seek his advice in writing or on phone. (iii) You can consult your predecessor/colleagues, etc., and then decide what to do. (iv) You can find out if any alternate plot can be got in exchange and then send a comprehensive written report. Can you suggest any other option with proper justification?

How to Approach

This question tests ethical reasoning, decision-making in a bureaucratic context, and understanding of potential conflicts of interest. The answer should systematically identify vested interests, analyze the merits and demerits of each proposed course of action, and propose a well-justified alternative. A strong answer will demonstrate integrity, adherence to rules, and a commitment to public interest. The structure should follow a logical flow: identifying interests, analyzing options, proposing a solution, and justifying it.

Model Answer

0 min read

Introduction

Public administration is entrusted with the responsibility of ensuring efficient, transparent, and ethical governance. Situations involving potential malfeasance, as presented in this case, require careful consideration and decisive action. The core principles of integrity, objectivity, and accountability, as enshrined in the Second Administrative Reforms Commission’s report on ‘Ethics in Governance’ (2007), are paramount. This case presents a classic dilemma where a district administrator uncovers irregularities in a land acquisition process and must navigate a complex web of vested interests while upholding the principles of good governance.

(a) Likely Vested Interests of Concerned Parties

Your Predecessor: Likely involved in the initial transaction with a potential personal benefit (financial or otherwise) due to the relationship with the Sarpanch. Facilitating the land acquisition could have been a quid pro quo.
Sarpanch (at the time of acquisition): Benefited from the nominal cost of land acquisition, potentially receiving a share of the financial gain or other favors. The familial relationship with your predecessor facilitated the transaction.
Chief Engineer & Senior Architect: May have been complicit in overlooking the fort’s presence and the heritage implications, potentially receiving inducements to provide favorable clearances.
State Headquarters Officer: Could be unaware of the irregularities, or potentially involved in the scheme, seeking to expedite the project regardless of its suitability or legality.
Potential Developers/Beneficiaries: Stand to gain from constructing the school on the land, especially if development charges are lower due to the oversight regarding the fort and heritage status.

(b) Analysis of Options

(i) Await the Visit of the Superior Officer and Let Him Take a Decision

Merits: Avoids direct confrontation and potential repercussions. Demonstrates respect for hierarchy. May benefit from the superior officer’s experience.

Demerits: Passes the responsibility without due diligence. Allows a potentially flawed project to proceed. Compromises ethical principles. Could be seen as complicity if the superior officer approves the project despite the irregularities.

(ii) Seek His Advice in Writing or on Phone

Merits: Informs the superior officer about the concerns without directly challenging his authority. Provides a documented record of the issue. Allows for a considered response.

Demerits: May not be sufficient to prevent a flawed decision. The superior officer might dismiss the concerns or pressure for a quick resolution. Delays the process.

(iii) Consult Your Predecessor/Colleagues, and Then Decide What to Do

Merits: Gathers more information and perspectives. May uncover additional details about the transaction.

Demerits: Consulting your predecessor, who is potentially involved, is highly inappropriate and compromises objectivity. Colleagues may be hesitant to provide honest feedback due to fear of repercussions. Could lead to a biased decision.

(iv) Find Out if Any Alternate Plot Can Be Got in Exchange and Then Send a Comprehensive Written Report

Merits: Proactive approach to finding a viable solution. Demonstrates a commitment to public interest and responsible governance. Provides a clear and documented record of the findings and proposed solution. Addresses the issues of site suitability and heritage concerns.

Demerits: May be time-consuming. Finding a suitable alternate plot may be challenging. Requires coordination with multiple departments.

(v) Additional Option: Initiate a Preliminary Enquiry/Fact-Finding Exercise

Justification: Before escalating the issue, a discreet preliminary enquiry can be initiated to gather more concrete evidence regarding the irregularities. This could involve reviewing land records, interviewing local residents (discreetly), and consulting with the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) regarding the fort’s heritage status. This strengthens the report and provides a stronger basis for action. This aligns with the principles of natural justice and due process. The enquiry should be conducted with utmost confidentiality to avoid influencing the outcome.

Conclusion

The most appropriate course of action is to pursue option (iv) – finding an alternate plot – coupled with option (v) – a preliminary enquiry. This demonstrates a commitment to ethical governance, transparency, and public interest. A comprehensive written report detailing the findings, the proposed alternate site, and the preliminary enquiry results should be submitted to the superior officer. Upholding the principles of integrity and accountability is crucial for maintaining public trust and ensuring effective administration. Delaying action or ignoring the irregularities would be a dereliction of duty and could have serious consequences.

Answer Length

This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.

Evaluate your handwritten answer in under a minute

Free trial available • Trusted by 1,00,000+ aspirants

Additional Resources

Key Definitions

Conflict of Interest

A situation in which a person's personal interests—financial or otherwise—could compromise their professional judgment or actions.

Quid Pro Quo

An exchange of goods or services, where one transfer is contingent upon the other; a favor or advantage granted or expected in return for something.

Key Statistics

According to Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index 2023, India ranked 93 out of 180 countries, indicating a significant level of perceived corruption.

Source: Transparency International (2023)

The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, was enacted to establish a mechanism for investigating allegations of corruption against public functionaries, but its implementation has been slow and faced challenges.

Source: PRS Legislative Research (as of knowledge cutoff)

Examples

2G Spectrum Allocation Scam

The 2G spectrum allocation scam (2010) in India involved the allocation of licenses for 2G mobile network frequencies at prices far below market value, resulting in significant financial losses to the government and highlighting the dangers of corruption and cronyism.

Frequently Asked Questions

▶What if the superior officer insists on proceeding with the original plan despite the irregularities?

If the superior officer insists, document the concerns in writing and seek a formal order stating the reasons for overriding the objections. Consider escalating the matter to higher authorities or, as a last resort, seeking legal counsel.

Topics Covered

EthicsGovernancePublic AdministrationCorruptionAccountabilityTransparency

Back to all GENERAL-STUDIES-PAPER-IV 2015 questions