General Studies 2022 GS Paper IV 20 marks 150 words Compulsory Critically examine

Q6

(a) Whistle-blower, who reports corruption and illegal activities, wrongdoing and misconduct to the concerned authorities, runs the risk of being exposed to grave danger, physical harm and victimization by the vested interests, accused persons and his team. What policy measures would you suggest to strengthen protection mechanism to safeguard the whistle-blower? (Answer in 150 words) 10 (b) In contemporary world, corporate sector's contribution in generating wealth and employment is increasing. In doing so, they are bringing in unprecedented onslaught on the climate, environmental sustainability and living conditions of human beings. In this background, do you find that Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is efficient and sufficient enough to fulfill the social roles and responsibilities needed in the corporate world for which the CSR is mandated? Critically examine. (Answer in 150 words) 10

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

(a) भ्रष्टाचार-सूचक (विसल-ब्लोअर) संबंधित अधिकारियों को भ्रष्टाचार और अवैध गतिविधियों, गलत काम और दुराचार की रिपोर्ट करता है। वह निहित स्वार्थों, आरोपी व्यक्तियों तथा उनकी टीम द्वारा गंभीर खतरे, शारीरिक नुकसान और उत्पीड़न के चपेट में आने का जोखिम उठाता है। आप भ्रष्टाचार-सूचक (विसल-ब्लोअर) की सुरक्षा के लिए मजबूत सुरक्षा व्यवस्था हेतु किन नीतिगत उपायों का सुझाव देंगे? (उत्तर 150 शब्दों में दीजिए) 10 (b) समकालीन दुनिया में धन और रोजगार उत्पन्न करने में कॉर्पोरेट क्षेत्र का योगदान बढ़ रहा है। ऐसा करने में वे जलवायु, पर्यावरणीय संधारणीयता और मानव की जीवन-स्थितियों पर अप्रत्याशित हमले कर रहे हैं। इस पृष्ठभूमि में, क्या आप पाते हैं कि कॉर्पोरेट सामाजिक जिम्मेदारी (सी० एस० आर०) कॉर्पोरेट जगत में आवश्यक सामाजिक भूमिकाओं और जिम्मेदारियों को पूरा करने में सक्षम और पर्याप्त है जिसके लिए सी० एस० आर० अनिवार्य है? विश्लेषणात्मक परीक्षण कीजिए। (उत्तर 150 शब्दों में दीजिए) 10

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

Directive word: Critically examine

This question asks you to critically examine. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.

See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

The question demands a dual approach: for (a) 'suggest' requires concrete policy recommendations for whistleblower protection; for (b) 'critically examine' demands balanced evaluation of CSR's efficacy with both merits and limitations. Allocate ~75 words to part (a) covering anonymity, legal safeguards and institutional mechanisms; ~75 words to part (b) presenting CSR's contributions followed by critical gaps and need for stronger regulation. Structure each part with brief context, 2-3 analytical points, and a forward-looking conclusion.

Key points expected

For (a): Legislative safeguards under Whistle Blowers Protection Act 2014 and proposed amendments for anonymity provisions
For (a): Institutional mechanisms like independent ombudsman, witness protection programme and secure digital reporting channels
For (b): CSR's positive contributions through Schedule VII activities and Section 135 compliance creating shared value
For (b): Critical limitations including 'greenwashing', peripheral CSR spending, lack of community participation in project selection
For (b): Need for mandatory social audit, stricter enforcement of Environment Social Governance (ESG) norms and shift from voluntary to regulated responsibility

Evaluation rubric

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Demand-directive understanding	20%	4	For (a) provides actionable policy measures rather than generic suggestions; for (b) offers genuine critical examination with balanced assessment of CSR efficacy, not mere description of provisions	Addresses both directives but (a) lists generic measures without specificity; (b) describes CSR activities without substantive critique or presents one-sided view	Misinterprets 'suggest' as opinion-giving without policy framing; treats 'critically examine' as 'explain' or 'enumerate' without analytical balance
Content depth & accuracy	20%	4	Demonstrates precise knowledge of Whistle Blowers Protection Act provisions, proposed amendments, Companies Act 2013 Section 135, Schedule VII activities, and distinguishes CSR from statutory environmental compliance	Mentions relevant laws but with gaps in specificity; conflates CSR with environmental regulations or presents outdated legal framework	Significant factual errors regarding legal provisions; confuses whistleblower protection with RTI or Lokpal mechanisms; misunderstands CSR mandate scope
Structure & flow	20%	4	Clear demarcation between (a) and (b) with parallel internal structure; each part moves from problem identification to solution/critique to forward-looking conclusion; tight 150-word discipline per part	Both parts addressed but with uneven weightage; some structural clarity but weak transitions or disproportionate allocation between problem and solution	Merges both parts indistinguishably or omits one part; rambling structure without logical progression; significantly exceeds word limit or severely underwrites one part
Examples / case-law / data	20%	4	For (a) cites specific cases like Satyendra Dubey or Sanjiv Chaturvedi to illustrate risks; for (b) references Vedanta-Cairn controversy, Tata Steel's tribal displacement issues, or CSR expenditure data trends from Ministry of Corporate Affairs reports	Generic mention of whistleblower victimization or CSR activities without specific cases; vague reference to 'some companies' or 'recent incidents'	No examples or case references; irrelevant examples from international context without Indian applicability; fabricated case names or data
Conclusion & analytical edge	20%	4	For (a) synthesizes measures into integrated protection ecosystem; for (b) presents nuanced position recognizing CSR as necessary but insufficient, advocating for mandatory social audit and ESG integration; demonstrates administrative insight	Summarizes points without synthesis; for (b) takes extreme position declaring CSR fully sufficient or completely ineffective without qualification	No conclusion or abrupt ending; repetitive summary of points; for (b) avoids taking any position on CSR efficacy; purely descriptive ending

Practice this exact question

Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.

Evaluate my answer →