Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
The Indian administrative system, envisioned as a steel frame, often finds itself confronting complex ethical challenges, especially in areas prone to corruption and illegal activities. Civil servants are expected to maintain integrity and uphold the law, even in the face of threats and intimidation. The case of Sunil highlights a classic conflict between duty and personal safety, exacerbated by the involvement of local power structures and a compromised bureaucracy. This scenario necessitates a careful evaluation of available options, balancing the need to enforce the law with the protection of oneself and one’s family.
Options Available to Sunil
- Option 1: Continue with Stringent Action: Persist with raids, investigations, and prosecution of those involved in illegal sand mining, despite the threats.
- Option 2: Seek Transfer: Request a transfer to a different district, avoiding direct confrontation with the mafia.
- Option 3: Negotiate/Compromise: Attempt to negotiate with the mafia, seeking a reduction in illegal activities in exchange for easing the pressure on them.
- Option 4: Seek Support from Higher Authorities: Escalate the matter to senior officials, requesting increased security and support for continued action.
- Option 5: Document and Wait: Continue gathering evidence meticulously but temporarily halt aggressive action, building a stronger case for future intervention.
Critical Evaluation of Each Option
| Option | Pros | Cons | Ethical Considerations |
|---|---|---|---|
| Continue with Stringent Action | Upholds the law, demonstrates courage, sends a strong message to deter others. | High risk to personal safety and family, potential for escalation of violence, may be unsustainable without adequate support. | Integrity, courage, duty, but also responsibility towards family. |
| Seek Transfer | Ensures personal safety, avoids immediate confrontation. | Abandoning duty, allowing illegal activities to continue, potentially demoralizing other officers. | Compromise of integrity, lack of courage, failure to uphold the law. |
| Negotiate/Compromise | May de-escalate the situation, potentially reduce illegal activities in the short term. | Legitimizes corruption, undermines the rule of law, sets a dangerous precedent. | Violation of integrity, compromise of ethical principles, potential legal repercussions. |
| Seek Support from Higher Authorities | Provides increased security, allows continued action with support, demonstrates responsible leadership. | Reliance on others, potential for inaction or inadequate support, may take time to materialize. | Integrity, courage, duty, responsible leadership, but requires trust in the system. |
| Document and Wait | Builds a stronger case, reduces immediate risk, allows for strategic intervention. | Allows illegal activities to continue, may lose momentum, potential for evidence to be tampered with. | Prudence, strategic thinking, but also potential compromise of duty. |
The Most Appropriate Option for Sunil
The most appropriate option for Sunil is a combination of Option 4 (Seek Support from Higher Authorities) and Option 5 (Document and Wait), followed by a renewed push with Option 1 (Continue with Stringent Action) once adequate support is secured. Immediately escalating the matter to the state government, the Home Secretary, and the Director General of Police is crucial. He should demand enhanced security for himself and his family, including round-the-clock protection. Simultaneously, he should meticulously document all evidence of illegal sand mining and the involvement of officials and mafia members. This documentation will be vital for future legal proceedings. A temporary pause in aggressive raids, while building a stronger case and securing support, is a pragmatic approach. Once sufficient support is in place, Sunil should resume stringent action, demonstrating unwavering commitment to the rule of law. This approach balances his duty to enforce the law with his responsibility to protect himself and his family. It also demonstrates responsible leadership by seeking assistance from higher authorities rather than acting in isolation.Conclusion
Sunil’s situation exemplifies the challenges faced by honest civil servants in India. While courage and integrity are paramount, a pragmatic approach that prioritizes personal safety and seeks institutional support is essential for sustained success. The case underscores the need for a robust system of protection for whistleblowers and officers tackling corruption, along with a strong commitment from higher authorities to support those who uphold the law. Ultimately, Sunil’s actions will not only impact the illegal sand mining operations in his district but also serve as an example for other officers facing similar dilemmas.
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.