2020 · GS Paper 4 · Q10 · 20 marks
You are a municipal commissioner of a large city, having the reputation of a very honest and upright officer. A huge multipurpose mall is under construction in your city in which a large number of daily wage earners are employed. One night, during monsoons, a big chunk of the roof collapsed causing instant death of four labourers including two minors. Many more were seriously injured requiring immediate medical attention. The mishap resulted in a big hue and cry, forcing the government to institute an enquiry. Your preliminary enquiry has revealed a series of anomalies. The material used for the construction was of poor quality. Despite the approved building plans permitting only one basement, an additional basement has been constructed. This was overlooked during the periodic inspections by the building inspector of the municipal corporation. In your enquiry, you noticed that the construction of the mall was given the green signal despite encroaching on areas earmarked for a green belt and a slip road in the Zonal Master Plan of the city. The permission to construct the mall was accorded by the previous Municipal Commissioner who is not only your senior and well known to you professionally, but also a good friend. Prima facie, the case appears to be of a widespread nexus between officials of the Municipal Corporation and the builders. Your colleagues are putting pressure on you to go slow in the enquiry. The builder, who is rich and influential, happens to be a close relative of a powerful minister in the state cabinet. The builder is persuading you to hush up the matter, promising you a fortune to do so. He also hinted that if this matter is not resolved at the earliest in his favour there is somebody in his office who is waiting to file a case against you under the POSH Act. Discuss the ethical issues involved in the case. What are the options available to you in this situation? Explain your selected course of action.
In short
The commissioner should reject the bribe, report it and the POSH threat in writing, and run a time-bound inquiry that fixes responsibility at every level, including the predecessor. The deaths stemmed from Regulatory Capture: poor material, an unapproved basement and approvals over a green belt.
Model answer
Ghissu Editorial · Verified 4 Oct 2026 · 281 words
Right to life
Poor material, an extra basement and child labour turned negligence into deaths.
Regulatory Capture
Lax inspections and approval over a green belt show the regulator serving the builder.
Bribery and intimidation
A fortune offered, colleagues' In-Group Bias and a threatened false POSH complaint test integrity.
(i) CAPITULATE [Compromised-Hybrid]
Taking the money is corrupt and criminal.
(ii) CONFRONT [Strict-Legal]
Arresting everyone at once ignores due process.
(iii) EVADE [Procedural-Evasive]
Recusing over friendship is Moral Escapism.
(iv) COMPROMISE [Empathetic-Humanitarian]
Sparing my predecessor is Dual-Standard Practice.
(v) RECONCILE ✓ [Balanced]
A time-bound inquiry fixing responsibility at every level (recommended).
Victims and site
Treat the injured, compensate families, seal the site and test materials independently.
No exemptions
Name every responsible official, as the Supreme Court did in the Supertech twin towers case (2021) [case].
Report bribe and threat
Inform the Chief Secretary and Anti-Corruption Bureau in writing and seek insulated investigation per Vineet Narain (1997) [case], standing firm as U. Sagayam [officer] did.
This model answer is indicative and the model can make mistakes; please verify key facts independently.
Practise this question
1Get the answer sheet
Sized for this question.
2Write your answer
Timed, by hand.
3Get it marked
Your score and what to fix.
This chapter in the exam
District and Local Administration Dilemmas7 questions
Asked in 6 of 14 sittings since 2013
- 2026Seema is a senior bureaucrat with a reputation of honesty and professional efficiency. She has recently been posted as the District Collector (DC) to Surinder Nagar, where a large industrial area is being established. The new industrial area had caused many farmers to submit applications for change of land use (CLU) to convert their farmlands into residential areas. There is an unusually large backlog of these applications awaiting processing. Seema noticed that some applications had been approved selectively with no visible chronological pattern. The case files showed a few complaints of some approvals being subject to receipt of large bribes from the applicants. On further fact-finding, Seema realized that a small group of touts was controlling this illegal activity through some subordinate officials in the Collectorate. This had created a fear in the other employees who were reluctant to process any application. The resultant backlog has been piling up thereby hindering local economic progress and causing public dissatisfaction. Seema was faced with a major moral and administrative challenge of dismantling this corruption network without hampering daily administrative operations. An aggressive internal investigation would result in institutional resistance and, possibly, a backlash from labour unions. Conversely, ignoring this situation would encourage the wrongdoers and unnecessarily continue this avoidable harassment to the populace. (a) What are the ethical issues involved in this case? (b) Discuss the options open to Seema. Identify the recommended option and justify it.
- 2025Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Program, MGNREGA was earlier known as National Rural Employment Scheme, NREGA. It is an Indian Social Welfare Program that aimed at fulfilling the 'Right to Work' provisions made in the Constitution. MGNREGA was launched in 2006 under Rural Employment Sector by the Ministry of Rural Development. Main objective of the program is to give legal guarantee of wage employment to the adult members of rural households who are willing to do unskilled manual labour work subject to a maximum of 100 days per year for every household. Every rural household has the right to register under the scheme, job card is issued to the registered, Job Card holder can seek employment; State Government shall pay 25% of minimum wage for the first 30 days as compensatory daily unemployment allowance to the families and of wage for remaining period of the year. MGNREGA work was undertaken by various Gram Panchayats. You have been appointed as an Administrator Incharge of the District. You have been given the responsibility of monitoring MGNREGA work undertaken by various Gram Panchayats. You are also given the authority to give technical sanctions to all MGNREGA works. In one of the Panchayats in your jurisdiction, you notice that your predecessor has mismanaged the Program in terms of: (i) Money not disbursed to actual job-seekers. (ii) Muster Rolls of the Labourers not properly maintained. (iii) Mismatch between the work done and payments made. (iv) Payments made to fictitious persons. (v) Job Cards were given without looking into the need of person. (vi) Mismanagement of funds and to the extent of siphoning of funds. (vii) Approved works that never existed. (a) What is your reaction to the above situation and how do you restore the proper functioning of MGNREGA Program in this regard? (b) What actions would you initiate to solve the various issues listed above? (c) How would you deal with the above situation?
All 7 questions, sorted by sub-topic, with model answers and practice.
Question from the official UPSC Civil Services (Main) Examination 2020 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.