2013 · GS Paper 4 · Q10 · 20 marks

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 which 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. (i) Follow the advice of the Chief Engineer and go ahead. (ii) 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. (iii) Call for explanation from the Junior Engineers and issue orders to the contractor for necessary correction within targeted time. (iv) Highlight the issue so that it reaches superiors above the Chief Engineer. (v) Considering the rigid attitude of the Chief Engineer, seek transfer from the project or report sick.

In short

The engineer should combine an exhaustive report seeking written orders with correction orders to the contractor, escalating above the Chief Engineer only if overruled in writing. Following the advice or seeking a transfer would trade public safety for speed or abandon it.

Model answer

Ghissu Editorial · Verified 4 Oct 2026

Introduction
This case tests whether an engineer's signature certifies safety or only the schedule. The core dilemma is between Public Safety and Timely Completion, layered on Obedience vs Professional Integrity.
Evaluating the Merits and Demerits of Each Option
•

(i) CAPITULATE [Compromised-Hybrid]

Following the Chief Engineer gives timely completion but is Conscience Laundering through Hierarchy that gambles with lives.

•

(ii) RECONCILE ✓ [Balanced]

A full report seeking written orders puts facts on record and fixes accountability, at some delay (recommended).

•

(iii) COMPROMISE [Strict-Legal]

Explanation from Junior Engineers and correction orders start rectification but sidestep the Chief Engineer.

•

(iv) CONFRONT [Empathetic-Humanitarian]

Going above the Chief Engineer early is a Lone-Rebel Reading.

•

(v) EVADE [Procedural-Evasive]

Transfer or sick leave is Moral Escapism and Bystander Apathy.

Course of Action I Would Take, With Reasons
•

Report and written orders

Combine (ii) with (iii), recording the disagreement as T.S.R. Subramanian (2013) [case] advised.

•

Contractor pays

Rectification is at the contractor's cost, as design deviation is his liability.

•

Escalate as last resort

If overruled in writing, place the file before the Commissioner, as Satyendra Dubey (NHAI, 2002) [officer] flagged highway contract irregularities to the Prime Minister's Office.

•

Honest public communication

A revised timeline, extra shifts and traffic diversions ease congestion without hiding the defect.

Justification:
Kant's Categorical Imperative: if every engineer certified unsafe work, no public structure could be trusted.
Conclusion
I would rectify the flyover before opening it, with the fastest safe schedule, because public pressure for speed never outweighs a structure's duty to stand.

This model answer is indicative and the model can make mistakes; please verify key facts independently.

Hand-drawn diagram: Public Safety vs Timely Completion. Public Safety vs Timely Completion. Venn diagram: Public Safety, Timely Completion; overlap: Rectify fast, on record
Diagram: Public Safety vs Timely Completion

Practise this question

  1. 1Get the answer sheet

    Sized for this question.

  2. 2Write your answer

    Timed, by hand.

  3. 3Get it marked

    Your score and what to fix.

Share this questionWhatsAppTelegramXLinkedIn

This chapter in the exam

Public Sector and PSU Dilemmas4 questions

Asked in 4 of 14 sittings since 2013

2013
1
2014
–
2015
–
2016
–
2017
–
2018
–
2019
–
2020
–
2021
1
2022
–
2023
1
2024
–
2025
1
2026
–

All 4 questions, sorted by sub-topic, with model answers and practice.

Question from the official UPSC Civil Services (Main) Examination 2013 paper. Answer written by Ghissu's engine and checked against our editorial standards. Found an error? Tell us and we correct it within 48 hours.

Ghissu

OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·