← All questionsGS4 · 2013 · Ethics Case Study ·Selection Pressure with Funding Bait
QUESTION 12
GS4
20 marks

You are heading a leading technical institute of the country. The institute is planning to convene an interview panel shortly under your chairmanship for selection of the post of professors. A few days before the interview, you get a call from the Personal Secretary (PS) of a senior government functionary seeking your intervention in favour of the selection of a close relative of the functionary for this post. The PS also informs you that he is aware of the long pending and urgent proposals of your institute for grant of funds for modernization, which are awaiting the functionary’s approval. He assures you that he would get these proposals cleared.1) What are the options available to you?2) Evaluate each of these options and choose the option which you would adopt, giving reasons.

WRITE IN
14 min
250 words

What the examiner wants

Decide how an institute head should respond to a request to favour a powerful functionary's relative, tied to pending funds.

Case studyName the stakeholders and the issues, weigh the options, and say what you would do and why.

Demand-wise check

  1. 1Stakeholders: candidates, students, institute, functionary and his PS, taxpayers≈50 words
  2. 2Ethical issues: merit and fairness, conflict of interest, quid pro quo amounting to corruption, institutional autonomy vs funding need≈50 words
  3. 3Options: oblige (gets funds, betrays merit, illegal); refuse outright (principled, may delay funds); recuse from panel (avoids bias but leaves pressure on others); refuse, record in writing and inform board/ministry while keeping selection transparent≈50 words
  4. 4Chosen: politely refuse, document the approach, ensure transparent criteria (published scores, external experts), pursue funds through formal channels≈50 words

Open in about 30 words and close in about 30.

Answer plan

StakeholdersIssues(a) list options(b) evaluate eachChosen course with reasons

Where marks usually go

  • Choosing to oblige 'for the institute's good'
  • Refusing without documenting the pressure

Draw this

  • Option table: option, merit, demerit, risk to institution

Value addition

  • LawPrevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act 2018 punishes obtaining 'undue advantage' for improper performance of public duty.PC Act, as amended 2018
  • ConstitutionArticle 16 guarantees equality of opportunity in public employment.Constitution of India

Mapped topper copies

Reviewed public-source references related to this PYQ. Same-syllabus references are labelled separately.

Links open original public sources. MainsBuddy does not host these answer sheets.