CSE 2013 Paper-4 (Ethics) Model Answer FRAMEWORK:

Q10. 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 un-addressed.
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. (250
words) 20marks

a) Follow the advice of the Chief Engineer and go ahead.

EVALUATION: Just shirking responsibility is not suitable in public service.The issue of ''Public safety" could not
be compromised in anyway, no matter who would be finally accountable for a mishap, if any, occurs in future. It
involves "differential but shared responsibility". Moreover, being in-charge of the project,and as i have actually
seen the serious lacunae i can not follow the advice of the chief engineer to IGNORE the issue.

b)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.

EVALUATION: For the same reason stated for option (a), i can not compromise the public safety by putting
forward a justification that the go-ahead order has been given "in writing' by the chief engineer.

c ) Call for explanation from the Junior Engineers and issue orders to the contractor for necessary correction
within targeted time.

EVALUATION: This , i think, must be done. Junior engineers have been misinforming me and I,being their
superior, must ask for explanation. In addition, being in-charge of the project and having authority , i will order the
contractor to correct the flaws possibly within the targeted time.

d) Highlight the issue so that it reaches superiors above the Chief Engineer.

EVALUATION: Highlighting the issue is desirable to complement the corrective action and validate my decision
by the superiors above the chief engineer as my immediate superior-the chief engineer's view is not in
consonance with me.

e)Considering the rigid attitude of the Chief Engineer, seek transfer from the project or report side.

EVALUATION: This, i think, is a very immature response to the issue at hand. It is an escaping tendency



Q.9. A Public Information Officer has received an application under RTI Act. Having gathered the information, the
PIO discovers that the information pertains to some of the decisions taken by him, which were found to be not
altogether right. There were other employees also who were party to these decisions. Disclosure of the
information is likely to lead to disciplinary action with possibility of punishment against him as well as some of his
colleagues. Non-disclosure or part disclosure or camouflaged disclosure of information will result into lesser
punishment or no punishment.
The PIO is otherwise an honest and conscientious person but this particular decision on which the RTI
application has been filed, turned out to be wrong He comes to you for advice.
The following are some suggested options. Please evaluate the merits and demerits of each of the options :

a) The PIO could refer the matter to his superior officer and seek his advice and act strictly in accordance with
the advice, even though he is not completely in agreement with the advice of the superior.

Evaluation: According to me this could not be a good option.It could have been a good solution when the PIO
had some confusion about the information sought. In the given case he knows everything clearly but could be
hesitant to give information as he himself shares some responsibility of the wrong decision. Moreover he doesn't
agree with the advice of the superior.

b) The PIO could proceed on leave and leave the matter to be dealt by his successor in offi ce or request for
transfer of the application to another PIO.

Evaluation:
Merit of this option is that it shows his unbiased approach but this also shows escaping tendency of the officer.
He should tackle the situation in a more mature way.

c) The PIO could weigh the consequences of disclosing the information truthfully, including the effect on his
career, and reply in a manner that would not place him or his career in Jeopardy, but at the same time a little
compromise can be made on the contents of the information.

Evaluation:
practical but unethical

d) The PIO could consult his other colleagues who are party to the decision and take action as per their advice.

EVALUATION:
This is an official position; Behaviour of the officer should be guided by standard operating manuals. He is not
dealing with personal affairs. So consulting colleagues and giving information as per convenience is not
warranted

Also please indicate (without necessarily restricting to the above options) what you would like to advise, giving
proper reasons. (250 words). 20

My advice to the officer:

Like personal decisions, administrative decisions are also taken by human beings. Although an officer could try to
think of the best , there remains the possibility of faults for simple reason that no any human is foolproof. If we
wish to take just correct decisions, we could never take a decision at all.

The PIO in the case should frankly give the correct information, along with the corrective measure(if any) taken
and admit the mistake without fearing the outcomes. He should also inform his colleagues about this. Otherwise
his integrity would be in question. Fearing the possible bad outcomes of a logical ,well intentional decision is not
a suitable trait for an officer. Making decision means choosing the best from the available alternatives and this
JUDGING PROCESS does have scope for error. For this reason, even the supreme court has given scope for
judicial review of a decision.





How would the emotional intelligence of an interrogation officer help in his work who is interrogating a captured
terrorist ?

Model answer:

Emotional intelligence , as conceptualized by Goleman, is the ability of an individual by which he accurately
recognizes various emotions and understands their triggers ; He also successfully controls and regulates his own
as well as other emotions in productive ways.
1.Good Start:
In this case the terrorist is most likely to show resistance and reluctance to start communication.
Here emotionally intelligent officer ,first of all, could give a better start than those who are emotionally blunt by
tuning himself emotionally with the terrorist and thus picking the most suitable question from the given
questionnaire. More over he would hit the point at right moment.
2. Motivator: Being capable, he could motivate terrorist to give up resistance and give the required information.
For this he could logical and emotional arguments to break psychological barrier. For examples proving that the
good cause terrorist for is not really good as it involves vested interest of a few terrorist leaders.
3. Controlling own frustration and anger due to delay and moving according to the interrogation plan. It could
give calculated results.
But all these are possibilities. It doesn't guarantee that he must be successful. Yes from his EQ he could decide
when to switch to pressure from persuasion techniques.




Q. Suppose you are a DM in a naxal affected area where people have very strong negative attitudes towards the
government. What would you do to bring about attitude change in the people.


Model answer outline:

An attitude is an evaluation that guides the ways we think, feel and behave.
Negative attitude is a negative evaluation. Modifying negative attitude requires redressal of problems which give
birth to negative attitude , and persuasion that they should reevaluate the government action and intention for
them. Obviously it would require visible development to make them see and believe , and logical-emotional
appeal to rethink their attitude position.
Keeping with research finding on attitude change, If such appeals are made by credible local celebrities and
leaders then effect would be speedy and wider.
Moreover we must try to immunize them from propaganda from the maoist group. They should be kept informed
about the maoist's ulterior motive. This technique has worked well internationally and in fighting terrorism in
Punjab Assam and Kashmir.
In the past lack of equitable development had been a major problem in our country it doesn't mean our
democracy has totally failed. It's the best form of government for everyone. This message must enter the mind of
people living in the naxal affected area.
In the ultimate analysis we find that their beliefs and perception towards the government need to be modified
then only we could change their attitude.






Ethics: Practical / Unethical / Hypocrite / Idealistic ?
Posted by arun kumar on Saturday, February 1, 2014 Under: Ethics - Model Answers
A political executive suggests a bureaucrat working in his ministry '' you need to pay attention only to what i say
privately, not what i say publicly. I make a no. of promises to the public, it does not mean all these should be
noted for executions. A democracy works not only on the real actions but on the big promises also which keep
the hopes of the people alive . No any government could eradicate social problems completely from a country but
almost every government in the world claims to do so.....Dreams and hopes should be kept alive otherwise a
state would fail.
From the above note what would you infer about the personality of the leader?
a. Practical
b. Unethical
c. Hypocrite
d. Idealistic

Ans:

It is a case of hypocrisy! The promises made to the public and to the bureaucrats is contradictory. The leader
clearly lacks integrity.




Q: If ideals don't work in practical life , then what's the rational behind effort-full maintenance of them in a society
?

Answer Framework:

Ideals are the best levels that people can strive to achieve. Ideals are are like the pole star which guides behavior
of navigators. Ideals though not fully achievable all the time , keep guiding human behaviours.

The absence of ideals means values are dying in society. And without values human beings would be no more
different from animals.

Mahatma Gandhi like many other philosopher strongly favoured idealism and advocated that society must
acknowledge its value. Corruption is widespread doesn't mean its value is better than honesty. Interestingly, even
most corrupt individuals value honesty more when asked to confess privately.



Case study:

A rapist and murderer is being chased by a group of people comprising women men and children... To save
himself , the person runs into a police post where you are present as a police officer. You try to save the life of
the person but the mob becomes violent and tries to take him away from you. You try to control the group from all
possible civilian means but it do not work. Now if you open fire more people could die than you are trying to save.
Moreover your morality could revolt for taking lives of innocent people for a criminal and if you don't it would be a
clear violation of law.

Now keeping aside what rules and laws say ,if you are to decide if you should fire or not just on the ethical
ground, what would you do and why?

Answer framework:
I would arrest the accused and use minimum force to control the violent mob.
Reason: Punishment, if one deserves , must be given by the court of law in a democracy. It shouldn't be left
decided by a mob or majority. It is lawful as well as ethical. Ethical criteria ,in this case cannot be consequential
but categorical as a Democratic system values fair trial and rule of law.





Point to remember

Need for ethics in public service:

Senator Fulbright identified a problem of government employees who committed ethical lapses not amounting to
criminal conduct. He asked what should be done about men who do not directly and blatantly sell the favors of
their offices for money and so place themselves within the penalties of the law? How do we deal with those who,
under the guise of friendship, accept favors, which offend the spirit of the law but do not violate its letter? He
further elaborated one of the most disturbing aspects of this problem of moral conduct is the revelation that
among so many influential people, morality has become identical with legality. We are certainly in a tragic plight if
the accepted standard by which we measure the integrity of a man in public life is that he keep within the letter of
the law.




Ethics: Election expenditure and corruption
Posted by arun kumar on Saturday, February 1, 2014 Under: Ethics- Points to remember
IAS Mains: GS Paper-V Ethics Integrity and Aptitude


Point to remember:


Large, illegal and illegitimate expenditure in elections is one of the root causes of corruption. While there are
formal limits to expenditure and some steps have been put in place in an attempt to check them, in reality, actual
expenditure is alleged to be far higher. Abnormal election expenditure has to be recouped in multiples to sustain
the electoral cycle!

This results in unavoidable and ubiquitous corruption altering the nature of political and administrative power
and undermining trust and democracy. Cleansing elections is the most important route to improve ethical
standards in politics, to curb corruption and rectify maladministration
In : Ethics- Points to remember