The Supreme Court has banned mining in the Aravalli Hills to stop degradation of the forest cover and to maintain ecological balance. However, the stone mining was still prevalent in the border district of the affected State with connivance of certain corrupt forest officials and politicians. Young and dynamic SP who was recently posted in the affected district promised to himself to stop this menace. In one of his surprise checks with his team, he found loaded truck with stone trying to escape the mining area. He tried to stop the truck but the truck driver overrun the police officer, killing him on the spot and thereafter managed to flee. Police filed FIR but no breakthrough was achieved in the case for almost three months. Ashok who was the Investigative Journalist working with leading TV channel, suo moto started investigating the case. Within one month, Ashok got breakthrough by interacting with local people, stone mining mafia and government officials. He prepared his investigative story and presented to the CMD of the TV channel. He exposed in his investigative report the complete nexus of stone mafia working with blessing of corrupt police and civil officials and politicians. The politician who was involved in the mafia was no one else but local MLA who was considered to be very close to the Chief Minister. After going through the investigative report, the CMD advised Ashok to drop the idea of making the story public through electronic media. He informed that the local MLA was not only the relative of the owner of the TV channel but also had unofficially 20 percent share in the channel. The CMD further informed Ashok that his further promotion and hike in pay will be taken care of in addition the soft loan of ₹ 10 lakhs which he has taken from the TV channel for his son’s chronic disease will be suitably adjusted if he hands over the investigative report to him.
(a) What are the options available with Ashok to cope up with the situation? (b) Critically evaluate/examine each of the options identified by Ashok. (c) What are the ethical dilemmas being faced by Ashok? (d) Which of the options, do you think, would be the most appropriate for Ashok to adopt and why? (e) In the above scenario, what type of training would you suggest for police officers posted to such districts where stone mining illegal activities are rampant?
Approach · directive: “what / critically evaluate / which”
What it asks · (a) List Ashok's options; (b) evaluate each; (c) name his ethical dilemmas; (d) choose the best option; (e) suggest training for police officers in districts hit by illegal stone mining.
The question has 5 parts — answer each
- (a) List the options available to Ashok to cope with the situation
- (b) Critically evaluate/examine each of the options
- (c) Identify the ethical dilemmas Ashok faces
- (d) Identify the most appropriate option for Ashok and justify it
- (e) Suggest the type of training for police officers posted to districts where illegal stone mining is rampant
Open with · Ashok holds a story that can expose a mining and political nexus, while his employer offers rewards and threatens his career to bury it.
Cover
- Stakeholders: Ashok and his son, the TV channel and its owner, the MLA and the mafia, police and forest officials, the slain SP's family, local people and the environment.
- (a)/(b) Hand over the report and accept the benefits: secures job and loan, but betrays the truth, the slain officer and the public. Drop the story quietly: safe but complicit.
- (a)/(b) Publish elsewhere: serves the public but risks defamation suits, job loss and safety. Give the evidence to police, an SIT or the CBI: lawful and credible, but leaks are possible.
- (a)/(b) Approach the High Court or Supreme Court, since mining is barred by the Court's own order, with legal and press-body support: strongest but slow.
- (c) Dilemmas: loyalty to the employer against duty to the public, truth against personal gain, his son's medical needs against integrity, press freedom against editorial control, and safety against courage.
- (d) Best: refuse the inducement, take the evidence to law-enforcement and the courts, publish through an independent outlet after legal vetting, and protect sources.
- (e) Training: mining, forest and environment laws; safe vehicle interdiction; forensic, satellite and drone monitoring; tracing money trails; integrity and community relations.
Close with · Lawful courage by the journalist, and trained, insulated police, honour officers who die enforcing the law.
Add value (verified)
- Nuh, Haryana (19 July 2022, PTI): a DSP investigating illegal stone-mining was killed when a truck he signalled to stop drove into him — the real event the case echoes. DSP who went to stop illegal mining mowed down in Haryana's Nuh — Deccan Herald (PTI), 19 July 2022 (national newspaper report) ↗“A deputy superintendent of police investigating illegal stone-mining was killed Tuesday when a truck he signalled to stop in Haryana’s Nuh district drove into him, officials said.”
- The Supreme Court banned all mining in the Aravalli hills by its order of 29/30 October 2002, as recorded in M.C. Mehta v Union of India (8 May 2009). M.C. Mehta v Union of India & Ors, Supreme Court of India, 8 May 2009 — Indian Kanoon ↗“On 29th/30th October, 2002 this Court prohibited and banned the mining activities in the entire Aravalli hills.”
- Gandhi, on his own journal Indian Opinion: the sole aim of journalism should be service; an uncontrolled pen serves only to destroy. Mahatma Gandhi on journalism (from his own writings) — mkgandhi.org ↗“In the very first month of Indian Opinion , I realized that the sole aim of journalism should be service. The newspaper press is a great power”
- Prakash Singh v Union of India (Supreme Court, 22 September 2006): commissions converged on a State Security Commission, a minimum fixed tenure for the police chief, separation of investigation from law and order, and a new Police Act. Prakash Singh & Ors v Union of India & Ors, Supreme Court of India, 22 September 2006 — Indian Kanoon ↗“There is convergence of views on the need to have (a) State Security Commission at State level; (b) transparent procedure for the appointment of Police Chief and the desirability of giving him a minimum fixed tenure; (c) separation of investigation work from law and order; and (d) a new Police Act”
- Mission Karmayogi (2020) calibrates civil service positions to a Framework of Roles, Activities and Competencies (FRACs) and builds learning content for each. Cabinet approves Mission Karmayogi, the National Programme for Civil Services Capacity Building — PIB, 2 September 2020 ↗“To calibrate all Civil Service positions to a Framework of Roles, Activities and Competencies (FRACs) approach and to create and deliver learningcontent relevant to the identified FRACs in every Government entity”
Question: UPSC's CS (Main) 2022, GS Paper IV — paper ↗. Approach: Minimalist IAS, checked 1 Oct 2026 (how we verify) — UPSC publishes no model answers. ·
Model answer · 372 words (UPSC limit 250) · Minimalist IAS
The case echoes a real tragedy: in July 2022 a DSP checking illegal stone-mining in Haryana's Nuh was killed by a truck he signalled to stop. Ashok has exposed the nexus behind such a killing and is offered promotion and a loan adjustment to bury it. Stakeholders: Ashok and his son, the channel, the MLA, the slain officer's family, local people and the Aravallis.
(a) Options available and (b) their critical evaluation
| Option | Merit | Demerit |
|---|---|---|
| Hand over report, take benefits | Job and son's treatment secure | Bribe in effect; betrays the dead officer |
| Drop the story quietly | Avoids the bribe | Abandons duty; nexus continues |
| Resign and publish elsewhere | Serves public interest | Defamation, job loss, danger |
- Give evidence to institutions: the investigating agency and the Supreme Court, which banned all mining in the Aravalli hills in 2002; lawful and turns a story into a case, but risks leaks and delay.
(c) Ethical dilemmas Ashok faces
- Loyalty to the employer against duty to the public; his son's health against integrity; press freedom against the owner's conflict of interest; safety against courage.
(d) The most appropriate option, and why
- Combine lawful steps: refuse and record the inducement, secure the evidence, hand it to the investigators, support a petition before the Supreme Court whose ban is being defied, publish through an independent, legally vetted outlet, and refinance the loan elsewhere.
- Why: Gandhi held that "the sole aim of journalism should be service". The public's right to know and a slain officer's claim to justice outweigh private gain; an owner shielding a relative has no claim on Ashok's loyalty.
(e) Training for police in illegal-mining districts
- Law: mining and forest laws, the Court's Aravalli orders, seizure and arrest powers.
- Safe interdiction: barriers, backup and body cameras; no officer stops a loaded truck alone.
- Technology and money trails: drone and satellite mapping of pits, GPS tracking of trucks, joint probes with mining and revenue departments.
- Integrity under pressure: role-based modules under Mission Karmayogi's competency framework (FRACs), backed by the Prakash Singh (2006) reforms (State Security Commission, fixed tenure) that shield officers from political interference.
Truth a court has affirmed cannot be sold to the man it indicts; lawful courage and trained, insulated police honour officers who die enforcing it.
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.