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.
What the examiner wants
As municipal commissioner, handle a deadly mall collapse involving officials, a friend's past role, a bribe and threats.
Demand-wise check
- 1Issues: loss of lives, child labour, corruption, conflict of interest (friend), intimidation, accountability≈65 words
- 2Options: go slow; act only against small staff; full action against all, including builder and officials≈65 words
- 3Course: register FIR, suspend officials, seal site, compensation, report bribe offer to ACB, inform seniors of threat, record conflict of interest, ensure audit of other projects≈65 words
Open in about 30 words and close in about 30.
Answer plan
Where marks usually go
- Protecting the friend
- Ignoring the minors employed
Draw this
- Stakeholder map: victims, builder, officials, friend, public
Value addition
- LawSection 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act (amended 2018) punishes public servants and also bribe-givers.PC Act 1988, amended 2018
- CodeNational Building Code 2016 sets structural safety norms enforced by municipal inspections.BIS NBC 2016
Mapped topper copies
Reviewed public-source references related to this PYQ. Same-syllabus references are labelled separately.
- Ritika Chitlangia · Page 22 ↗Reviewed PYQ reference
- Aakash Garg · AIR 5 · Page 29 ↗Same syllabus reference
- Shakti Dubey · AIR 1 · Page 37 ↗Same syllabus reference
- Shakti Dubey · AIR 1 · Page 39 ↗Same syllabus reference
Links open original public sources. MainsBuddy does not host these answer sheets.
Next: plan for one minute, write it in 14 minutes, then get it checked.