Saraswati was a successful IT professional in USA. Moved by the patriotic sense of doing something for the country she returned to India. Together with some other like-minded friends, she formed an NGO to build a school for a poor rural community.
The objective of the school was to provide the best quality modern education at a nominal cost. She soon discovered that she has to seek permission from a number of Government agencies. The rules and procedures were quite confusing and cumbersome. What frustrated her most was the delays, callous attitude of officials and constant demand for bribes. Her experience and the experience of many others like her has deterred people from taking up social service projects.
A measure of Government control over voluntary social work is necessary. But it should not be exercised in a coercive or corrupt manner. What measures can you suggest to ensure that due control is exercised but well meaning, honest NGO efforts are not thwarted ?
Approach · directive: “what measures can you suggest”
What it asks · Suggest a system that lets the State regulate NGOs against misuse and fraud without harassing honest ones or inviting bribes.
The question has 2 parts — answer each
- Suggest measures that ensure due Government control over voluntary social work
- Ensure those measures are neither coercive nor corrupt and do not thwart honest NGO efforts
Open with · Voluntary bodies fill gaps in education and health, and regulation should prevent misuse without creating a permit-and-bribe regime that drives out honest effort.
Cover
- Stakeholders: honest NGOs and their beneficiaries, officials, donors, the Government and taxpayers, and the public; the aim is to protect trust in social service.
- Diagnosis: control is needed against fraud and misuse, but unclear rules, wide discretion, delays and bribe demands burden honest NGOs and reward those who pay.
- Simplify: a single-window online registration and approval system with a unique ID, clear checklists, published time limits and deemed approval after the limit.
- Regulate by risk: light-touch rules for small, low-risk groups, closer scrutiny of large or foreign-funded ones, and audits in place of prior permission for everything.
- Transparency and self-regulation: online disclosure of accounts, board and funding sources, social audits, independent accreditation and codes of conduct by NGO networks.
- Officials' accountability: citizen's charters for NGO services, digital tracking of files, vigilance action for bribe demands, an appeal authority, and fair hearing before penalties.
- Partnership and own part: treat NGOs as partners, as the National Policy on the Voluntary Sector (2007) envisaged; Saraswati can refuse bribes, use RTI and press for reform with others.
Close with · Regulation built on transparency, clear rules and accountable officials protects the public without shutting the door on honest social service.
Add value (verified)
- The 2nd ARC's 9th Report: voluntary organisations often feel harassed by legal obligations, while government institutions have not regulated the sector effectively; misuse of tax provisions and fraud have become frequent. Second Administrative Reforms Commission, 9th Report: Social Capital – A Shared Destiny (DARPG, archived copy) ↗“While, voluntary organisations often feel harassed in complying with various legal obligations, institutions of the government too have not been effective in regulating the sector and securing legal compliance. Instances of misuse of tax provisions, fraud and poor governance have become frequent.”
- The 2nd ARC proposed that organisations with small foreign receipts be exempt from registration and file only an annual return, so that authorities can concentrate on larger foreign funding. Second Administrative Reforms Commission, 9th Report: Social Capital – A Shared Destiny (DARPG, archived copy) ↗“should be exempt from registration and other reporting requirements. The organisations, instead, should be asked to file an annual return of foreign contributions received by them and its utilisation at the end of the year. This step will allow the authorities to concentrate more on organisations receiving larger foreign funding.”
- The 2nd ARC: accreditation of voluntary organisations should not be so complex as to cause harassment, delay and corruption, and is best done by the sector itself. Second Administrative Reforms Commission, 9th Report: Social Capital – A Shared Destiny (DARPG, archived copy) ↗“The procedure adopted for accreditation / certification should not be so complex as to lead to harassment, delay and corruption. 3.2.7.2.3 It is generally agreed that accreditation could be best done by the voluntary sector itself.”
- Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018 (Act 16 of 2018): a person compelled to give an undue advantage is not liable if he reports it to the law enforcement authority within seven days. Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Bill, 2018 as passed by both Houses (Act No. 16 of 2018) — PRS Legislative Research ↗“Provided that the provisions of this section shall not apply where a person is compelled to give such undue advantage: Provided further that the person so compelled shall report the matter to the law enforcement authority or investigating agency within a period of seven days from the date of giving such undue advantage”
- RTI Act, 2005, s. 7(1): the Public Information Officer must provide the information or reject the request within thirty days of receipt. Right to Information Act, 2005 — Department of Personnel and Training ↗“on receipt of a request under section 6 shall, as expeditiously as possible, and in any case within thirty days of the receipt of the request, either provide the information on payment of such fee as may be prescribed or reject the request”
Question: UPSC's CS (Main) 2016, GS Paper IV — paper ↗. Approach: Minimalist IAS, checked 1 Oct 2026 (how we verify) — UPSC publishes no model answers. ·
Model answer · 349 words (UPSC limit 300) · Minimalist IAS
The 2nd ARC captured Saraswati's paradox: voluntary organisations "often feel harassed" by legal obligations, yet regulators "have not been effective" in regulating the sector. Good control must be strict on misuse and light on honest effort.
Why some control is needed
- Trust and money: voluntary bodies handle donor and public funds and serve vulnerable people; the ARC noted frequent "misuse of tax provisions, fraud and poor governance".
- The present failure: multiple permissions, unclear rules and wide discretion create delay and openings for bribes, deterring the honest and rewarding those who pay.
Measures for due control without coercion or corruption
| Organisation | Regulatory touch |
|---|---|
| Small, local, self-funded | Registration and annual return |
| Government-funded | Audit and social audit |
| Large, foreign-funded | Closer scrutiny |
- Single window: one online portal for registration and every approval, clear checklists, published time limits and deemed approval when a limit lapses.
- Risk-based regulation: the ARC proposed exempting bodies with small foreign receipts from registration in favour of an annual return, so that authorities could concentrate on large foreign funding.
- Credible accreditation: an independent accreditation agency, ideally led by the sector itself, with procedures not so complex as to breed "harassment, delay and corruption".
- Transparency over inspection: online disclosure of accounts, board and funding; social audits with beneficiaries; codes of conduct by NGO networks.
- Accountable officials: a citizen's charter for NGO services, digital file tracking, an appellate authority, a hearing before any penalty, and vigilance action on bribe demands.
- Partnership: the National Policy on the Voluntary Sector (2007) treats NGOs as partners in development; consult them on the rules that govern them.
What Saraswati herself can do
- Use the law: refuse bribes; under the RTI Act an information officer must respond within 30 days, so she can track her file; since 2018 the amended Prevention of Corruption Act spares a person compelled to pay a bribe who reports it within seven days.
- Collective voice: join NGO networks to press for reform rather than withdraw.
Control should follow money and outcomes, not intentions. Clear, time-bound and transparent rules let the State keep its oversight while honest volunteers like Saraswati keep building schools.
Written by Minimalist IAS from facts checked at source (how we verify) — a little fuller than exam length, so every part of the question is covered; in the hall, keep the structure and trim the detail. UPSC publishes no model answers: compare your structure and coverage with this, then write your own.