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.
Approach · directive: “discuss / what options / explain”
What it asks · Identify the ethical issues (public safety, corruption, friendship and seniority against duty, pressure and threats), list the options and explain the course chosen.
The question has 3 parts — answer each
- Discuss the ethical issues involved in the case
- Set out the options available to you in this situation
- Explain the course of action you select
Open with · Four labourers are dead because rules were bent; my duty to the victims and the law leaves no room to hush the matter up.
Cover
- Stakeholders: victims and their families, injured workers, the builder and the minister, municipal staff and the former commissioner, colleagues, the government and the public.
- Ethical issues: deaths through negligence and corruption, duty to workers and minors, conflict of interest with a friend, bribe and threat, and truthfulness.
- Options rejected: yielding to the bribe or going slow to protect a friend would betray the victims and the law, and invite criminal liability.
- Course chosen: a fair, time-bound enquiry: secure records, samples and inspection files, get technical reports, and fix responsibility on builder, inspectors and officials.
- Pressure and conflict: disclose my friendship with the former commissioner, report the bribe offer to the vigilance authority or police, and keep communication in writing.
- The POSH threat: a genuine complaint goes to the Internal Committee for impartial inquiry; the threat of a false one cannot change my duty.
- Relief and reform: care and compensation for victims, stop work, act against the builder and negligent staff, and introduce third-party inspection audits.
Close with · Integrity means following the evidence wherever it leads: justice for the labourers, accountability for the guilty and a safer building system.
Add value (verified)
- The POSH Act itself provides for action against a complaint found to be malicious or knowingly false, so the builder's threat of a false complaint has a legal answer and cannot be a reason to soften the enquiry. Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, Section 14, hosted by Delhi Police ↗“Where the Internal Committee or the Local Committee, as the case may be, arrives at a conclusion that the allegation against the respondent is malicious or the aggrieved woman or any other person making the complaint has made the complaint knowing it to be false”
- T.S.R. Subramanian v Union of India (Supreme Court, 31 October 2013): civil servants cannot act on oral instructions and must be protected against arbitrary pressure from superiors, the political executive and business. T.S.R. Subramanian & Ors vs Union of India & Ors, Supreme Court, 31 October 2013 — Indian Kanoon ↗“We are of the view that the civil servants cannot function on the basis of verbal or oral instructions, orders, suggestions, proposals, etc. and they must also be protected against wrongful and arbitrary pressure exerted by the administrative superiors, political executive, business and other vested interests.”
- Rule 3(1)(xiii)-(xiv) of the CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964: declare private interests relating to public duties, resolve conflicts so as to protect the public interest, and accept no obligation that may influence official duties. Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964, Rule 3(1), updated to 27 February 2015 — DoPT ↗“(xiii) declare any private interests relating to his public duties and take steps to resolve any conflicts in a way that protects the public interest; (xiv) not place himself under any financial or other obligations to any individual or organisation which may influence him in the performance of his official duties;”
- A.K. Kraipak v Union of India (Supreme Court, 29 April 1969): natural justice bars a person from being a judge in his own cause; a reasonable likelihood of bias vitiates the decision. A. K. Kraipak & Ors. vs Union of India & Ors., Supreme Court, 29 April 1969 — Indian Kanoon ↗“It is against all canons of justice to make a man judge in his own cause.”
- Nolan principle of Integrity: avoid obligations to those who might influence one's work, take no decision for personal, family or friends' gain, and declare and resolve interests and relationships. The Seven Principles of Public Life — Committee on Standards in Public Life, GOV.UK (31 May 1995) ↗“Holders of public office must avoid placing themselves under any obligation to people or organisations that might try inappropriately to influence them in their work. They should not act or take decisions in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves, their family, or their friends. They must declare and resolve any interests and relationships.”
- Gandhi's Young India (22 October 1925) printed seven social sins, among them 'politics without principle' and 'commerce without morality'. Seven Social Sins — mkgandhi.org (Bombay Sarvodaya Mandal & Gandhi Research Foundation) ↗“Seven Social Sins Politics without Principle Wealth Without Work Pleasure Without Conscience Knowledge without Character Commerce without Morality Science without Humanity Worship without Sacrifice - Young India, 22-10-1925”
Question: UPSC's CS (Main) 2020, GS Paper IV — paper ↗. Approach: Minimalist IAS, checked 1 Oct 2026 (how we verify) — UPSC publishes no model answers. ·
Model answer · 383 words (UPSC limit 250) · Minimalist IAS
Four labourers, two of them minors, died because approvals were bent and inspections looked away. The Supreme Court has said civil servants must be shielded from "wrongful and arbitrary pressure"; this enquiry is where that shield must hold.
Stakeholders
- Victims' families; the builder and the minister; the former commissioner and municipal staff; colleagues; the public.
Ethical issues
- Life before profit: poor material, an illegal basement and encroachment on a green belt and slip road traded safety for gain; minors on site compound the wrong.
- Corruption and nexus: inspectors and officials colluded; the builder's offer to buy the enquiry is an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
- Conflict of interest: the approving officer is my senior and friend; the conduct rules (CCS for central servants, AIS Rule 3(2B) for an IAS officer) require me to declare private interests and resolve conflicts "in a way that protects the public interest".
- Pressure and intimidation: colleagues' go-slow advice, a minister's shadow and a threatened false POSH complaint test courage.
Options
| Option | Merit | Demerit |
|---|---|---|
| Go slow or dilute the report | Peace with peers and the minister | Betrays victims; makes me complicit |
| Recuse because of friendship | Avoids any bias | May read as evasion |
| Fair, time-bound enquiry with disclosure | Justice and accountability | Personal risk |
My course of action
- Disclose first: record my friendship and seek the government's direction; A.K. Kraipak (1969) held it "against all canons of justice to make a man judge in his own cause", and a friend's cause is close to one's own.
- Secure evidence: seal the site, seize approval and inspection files, order independent structural tests.
- Report the bribe and the threat to the vigilance authority and police in writing; the Nolan principle of integrity bars any obligation to those "that might try inappropriately to influence them".
- POSH threat: the Internal Committee handles any complaint; the Act allows action against malicious ones.
- Fix responsibility on the builder, inspectors and approving officers, my friend included if evidence warrants, and ensure compensation for the victims.
Systemic fix
- Third-party structural audits, randomised inspections, digital approval trails and protection for honest inspectors.
Integrity means following the evidence wherever it leads, to a friend or a minister's relative; exposing what Young India (1925) called politics without principle and commerce without morality is the truest memorial to the four labourers.
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.