General Studies 2022 GS Paper IV 20 marks 150 words Critically evaluate

GS Paper IV — Q1

(a) Wisdom lies in knowing what to reckon with and what to overlook. An officer being engrossed with the periphery, ignoring the…

(a)

Wisdom lies in knowing what to reckon with and what to overlook. An officer being engrossed with the periphery, ignoring the core issues before him, is not rare in the bureaucracy. Do you agree that such preoccupation of an administrator leads to travesty of justice to the cause of effective service delivery and good governance? Critically evaluate. (Answer in 150 words) 10 marks

(b)

Apart from intellectual competency and moral qualities, empathy and compassion are some of the other vital attributes that facilitate the civil servants to be more competent in tackling the crucial issues or taking critical decisions. Explain with suitable illustrations. (Answer in 150 words) 10 marks

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

(a)

बुद्धिमानी में निहित है कि किसका ध्यान रखा जाए और क्या अनदेखा किया जाए। नौकरशाही में अपने सामने के मुख्य मुद्दों को अनदेखा करते हुए परिधि में लीन रहने वाले अधिकारी दुर्लभ नहीं हैं। क्या आप इस बात से सहमत हैं कि प्रशासक की इस तरह की व्यस्तता प्रभावी सेवा वितरण और सुशासन की लक्ष्य-प्राप्ति की प्रक्रिया में न्याय की विडंबना है? विश्लेषणात्मक मूल्यांकन कीजिए। (उत्तर 150 शब्दों में दीजिए)

(b)

बौद्धिक दक्षता और नैतिक गुणों के अलावा सहानुभूति और करुणा कुछ अन्य महत्वपूर्ण विशिष्ट्य हैं, जो सिविल सेवकों को निर्णायक मामलों को सुलझाने अथवा महत्वपूर्ण निर्णय लेने में अधिक सक्षम बनाते हैं। उपयुक्त उदाहरणों के साथ व्याख्या कीजिए। (उत्तर 150 शब्दों में दीजिए)

The question as printed in the 2022 General Studies paper

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2022 General Studies questions

Model answer

Drafted with AI by UPSC Answer Check against this question's marking rubric, to the 150-word length. UPSC does not publish answers for Mains — this is one way to score well, not an official key. How we build rubrics and answers.

(a) Preoccupation with the periphery and the travesty of justice

Administrative wisdom is selective attention: telling the core — the citizen's entitlement, the public purpose — from the periphery of formats, protocol and file movement.

Largely, I agree. An officer absorbed in the periphery delays and denies service: a pension held up for a spelling mismatch, a hospital's equipment idle for want of one signature. Each delay falls hardest on the poor, who cannot pay for speed, and erodes trust in the state — a real travesty of justice and of good governance.

Yet the evaluation must be critical. Procedure is not always periphery: tender rules, audit trails and due process prevent arbitrariness and corruption,. The fault lies not in attention to process but in losing proportion. The remedy is outcome-based appraisal, delegation of routine matters, and a culture that asks, "what does this decision change for the citizen?"

(b) Empathy and compassion as attributes of a competent civil servant

Intellect tells an officer what the rules allow; empathy tells them what the person in front of them actually needs. Together they produce decisions that are both lawful and humane.

Illustrations:

Disaster response: during the 2018 Kerala floods, officers who stayed with relief camps and involved fishermen in rescue earned cooperation that orders alone could not.
Welfare delivery: an officer who notices that an elderly widow's ration is denied because her biometric fails, and uses the exception-handling provision under the NFSA, prevents exclusion.
Tribal rights: empathetic handling of claims under the Forest Rights Act, 2006, with gram sabha verification, balances conservation with livelihoods.
Conflict situations: listening to protesters before acting often defuses law-and-order situations.

Compassion must stay within law: it guides discretion, it does not license favouritism.

How this answer will be evaluated

Framework: GS4 Ethical Dilemma & Administrative Competence

What earns full marks: Precise definitions, strong administrative examples, balanced judgment, clear link to public trust.

Evaluation rubric

Each sub-part is marked on its own, against the marks and word limit printed on the paper.

(a) Assess the impact of bureaucratic focus on periphery vs core issues on service delivery. 10 marks · 150 words

critically evaluate— positives → negatives/limits → conditions/safeguards → conclusion
Must cover
- Define 'periphery' vs 'core' in administrative context
- Link preoccupation to 'travesty of justice'
- Connect to 'effective service delivery' and 'good governance'
- Provide balanced judgment on the statement
Loses marks
- Preaching without administrative reasoning
- Ignoring the 'travesty of justice' aspect
- Vague generalities without specific examples
Earns more
- Mention 'red tape' or 'proceduralism' as the periphery
- Cite specific example of delayed justice (e.g., land records)
- Reference 'outcome-oriented' vs 'process-oriented' administration
- Mention 'accountability' vs 'responsiveness' trade-off
Extra mark
- Reference 'Right to Information' as a corrective
- Mention 'e-governance' as a tool to reduce periphery
(b) Explain how empathy and compassion aid civil servants in critical decision-making. 10 marks · 150 words

explain— definition/context → points in order → small example → short close
Must cover
- Define empathy and compassion in administrative context
- Show how they facilitate 'tackling crucial issues'
- Show how they aid 'critical decisions'
- Provide suitable illustrations
Loses marks
- Listing values without explaining their utility
- Ignoring the 'critical decision' aspect
- Preaching moral lessons instead of administrative analysis
Earns more
- Example: Disaster management (empathy for victims)
- Example: Policy formulation (compassion for marginalized)
- Mention 'human-centric' administration
- Link to 'emotional intelligence' in leadership
Extra mark
- Reference 'Nudge theory' in policy design
- Mention 'Restorative justice' as an application

What "Critically evaluate" is asking you to do

Judge how well something has performed against the standard it set for itself — its stated aim, mandate or promise — and commit to a verdict. Name the yardstick before you judge; an unanchored judgement reads as opinion. “Critically” is not a section added at the end: name the yardstick you are judging by — the evidence, the stated objective, a constitutional principle, a rival explanation — and let a verdict close each part of the body. Where the question quotes a claim, that verdict must land on the claim itself, accepted, qualified or rejected, and not on the theme in general.

Structure that answers it

Name the yardstick — stated aim, mandate or benchmark → performance against it → shortfall against it → why the gap exists → verdict

Where marks are lost

Merits in one paragraph, demerits in the next, and a conclusion calling for a balanced and holistic approach. That is a survey with the judgement left out and it holds the answer in the middle band. The opposite error is reading “critically” as permission to attack — and with the odd pairings, critically describe or critically explain, the exposition still carries most of the marks, the judgement being a layer on it rather than a substitute for it.

All UPSC directive words, compared →

Practice this exact question

Write your answer and it is marked point by point against the model answer above — what you covered, what you missed, what you got wrong.

Evaluate my answer →