GS Paper IV — Q9
The Supreme Court has banned mining in the Aravalli Hills to stop degradation of the forest cover and to maintain ecological…
The Supreme Court has banned mining in the Aravalli Hills to stop degradation of the forest cover and to maintain ecological balance. However, the stone mining was still prevalent in the border district of the affected State with connivance of certain corrupt forest officials and politicians. Young and dynamic SP who was recently posted in the affected district promised to himself to stop this menace. In one of his surprise checks with his team, he found loaded truck with stone trying to escape the mining area. He tried to stop the truck but the truck driver overrun the police officer, killing him on the spot and thereafter managed to flee. Police filed FIR but no breakthrough was achieved in the case for almost three months. Ashok who was the Investigative Journalist working with leading TV channel, suo moto started investigating the case. Within one month, Ashok got breakthrough by interacting with local people, stone mining mafia and government officials. He prepared his investigative story and presented to the CMD of the TV channel. He exposed in his investigative report the complete nexus of stone mafia working with blessing of corrupt police and civil officials and politicians. The politician who was involved in the mafia was no one else but local MLA who was considered to be very close to the Chief Minister. After going through the investigative report, the CMD advised Ashok to drop the idea of making the story public through electronic media. He informed that the local MLA was not only the relative of the owner of the TV channel but also had unofficially 20 percent share in the channel. The CMD further informed Ashok that his further promotion and hike in pay will be taken care of in addition the soft loan of ₹ 10 lakhs which he has taken from the TV channel for his son's chronic disease will be suitably adjusted if he hands over the investigative report to him.
What are the options available with Ashok to cope up with the situation?
Critically evaluate/examine each of the options identified by Ashok.
What are the ethical dilemmas being faced by Ashok?
Which of the options, do you think, would be the most appropriate for Ashok to adopt and why?
In the above scenario, what type of training would you suggest for police officers posted to such districts where stone mining illegal activities are rampant?
हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें
उच्चतम न्यायालय ने वन आवरण के क्षरण को रोकने और पारिस्थितिक संतुलन बनाए रखने के लिए अरावली पहाड़ियों में खनन पर प्रतिबंध लगा दिया है। हालांकि, कुछ भ्रष्ट वन अधिकारियों और राजनेताओं की मिलीभगत से प्रभावित राज्य के सीमावर्ती जिले में पत्थर-खनन फिर भी प्रचलित था। हाल ही में प्रभावित जिले में तैनात युवा और सक्रिय एस० पी० ने इस खतरे को रोकने के लिए खुद से वादा किया था। अपनी टीम के साथ अचानक जाँच में, उन्होंने खनन क्षेत्र से बचने की कोशिश कर रहा पत्थर से भरा ट्रक पाया। उसने इस ट्रक को रोकने की कोशिश की लेकिन ट्रक चालक ने पुलिस अधिकारी को कुचल दिया, जिससे उसकी मौके पर ही मौत हो गई और वह इसके बाद वहाँ से भागने में सफल रहा। पुलिस ने प्रथम सूचना रिपोर्ट (एफ० आई० आर०) दर्ज की लेकिन करीब तीन महीने तक मामले में कोई सफलता हासिल नहीं हुई। अशोक, जो प्रमुख टी० वी० चैनल के साथ काम कर रहे खोजी पत्रकार थे, ने स्वतः संज्ञान से मामले की जाँच शुरू की। एक महीने में ही अशोक को स्थानीय लोगों, पत्थर-खनन माफिया और सरकारी अधिकारियों से बातचीत कर सफलता मिली। उन्होंने अपनी खोजी रिपोर्ट तैयार की और टी० वी० चैनल के सी० एम० डी० के सामने पेश की। उन्होंने अपनी जाँच रिपोर्ट में भ्रष्ट पुलिस और सिविल अधिकारियों तथा राजनेताओं के आशीर्वाद से काम करने वाले पत्थर माफिया की पूरी गठजोड़ का खुलासा किया। माफिया में शामिल राजनेता कोई और नहीं बल्कि स्थानीय विधायक थे जो मुख्यमंत्री के बेहद करीबी माने जाते हैं। जाँच रिपोर्ट देखने के बाद सी० एम० डी० ने अशोक को सलाह दी कि वह इलेक्ट्रॉनिक मीडिया के माध्यम से रिपोर्ट को सार्वजनिक करने का विचार छोड़ दे। उन्होंने सूचित किया कि स्थानीय विधायक न केवल टी० वी० चैनल के मालिक के रिश्तेदार थे बल्कि अनौपचारिक रूप से चैनल के साथ 20 प्रतिशत के हिस्सेदार भी हैं। सी० एम० डी० ने अशोक को आगे बताया कि अगर वह जाँच रिपोर्ट उन्हें सौंप दे, तो उनके बेटे की पुरानी बीमारी के लिए टी० वी० चैनल से उधार लिए गए 10 लाख रुपये के सॉफ्ट लोन के अलावा उनकी आगे की पदोन्नति और वेतन में बढ़ोतरी का ध्यान रखा जाएगा।
इस स्थिति से निपटने के लिए अशोक के पास क्या विकल्प उपलब्ध हैं?
अशोक द्वारा चिह्नित किए गए प्रत्येक विकल्प का समालोचनात्मक मूल्यांकन/परीक्षण कीजिए।
अशोक को किन नैतिक दुविधाओं का सामना करना पड़ रहा है?
आपको क्या लगता है कि अशोक के लिए किस विकल्प को अपनाना सबसे उपयुक्त होगा और क्यों?
उपर्युक्त परिदृश्य में, आप ऐसे जिले में तैनात पुलिस अधिकारियों के लिए किस प्रकार के प्रशिक्षण का सुझाव देंगे जहाँ पत्थर-खनन की अवैध गतिविधियाँ प्रचलित हैं?
Model answer
Drafted with AI by UPSC Answer Check against this question's marking rubric, to the 250-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) Options available to Ashok
- Hand over the report to the CMD, accept the loan waiver and promotion, and drop the story.
- Refuse, and press for publication through the channel's editorial board.
- Resign and publish through an independent outlet.
- Place the evidence before statutory authorities—the police/CBI probing the SP's death, the Supreme Court's Central Empowered Committee, the NGT—and the Press Council of India.
- Leak the story anonymously or post it on social media.
(b) Critical evaluation
- Hand over: solves his son's medical and loan burden, but makes him complicit in covering up a killing and illegal mining, and leaves him open to future blackmail.
- Push internally: the right first step, but the CMD's conflict of interest (the MLA is the owner's relative and holds a stake) makes success unlikely.
- Resign and publish elsewhere: preserves integrity, but costs his income when his son needs treatment, and the ₹10 lakh loan may be recalled.
- Statutory route: turns the story into evidence under judicial oversight and gives him institutional protection, though it is slower.
- Anonymous leak: quick, but unverified material is easy to discredit, may breach his contract and can expose sources.
(c) Ethical dilemmas Duty to the public vs loyalty to the employer; truth vs his son's health and the family's finances; career advancement vs moral courage; safety of sources and family vs exposing a powerful nexus; the CMD's conflict of interest vs editorial independence.
(d) Most appropriate option A combination of options 4 and 3. Ashok should first secure copies of his evidence (including the CMD's offer), then hand them to the investigating agency and the Central Empowered Committee, so that the SP's death and the mining racket are probed under judicial oversight. If the channel still blocks the story, he should decline the offer, repay or restructure the loan on normal terms, and publish through a credible independent outlet, following the Press Council's Norms of Journalistic Conduct. For his son's treatment he can draw on insurance, government schemes such as PM-JAY and journalist welfare funds. Press freedom, which the Supreme Court has called a foundation of democracy (Romesh Thappar, Indian Express Newspapers), cannot be traded for private gain; accepting the offer would also betray the SP who died doing his duty.
(e) Training for police officers in mining-affected districts
- Legal: mining and forest laws (MMDR Act, Forest Conservation Act), Supreme Court orders on the Aravallis, FIR and seizure procedure.
- Tactical: safe vehicle interception (spike strips and barricades rather than officers on foot), team-based raids and backup protocols.
- Technology: drones, satellite imagery, GPS tracking of mineral trucks, ANPR cameras at check-posts and digital evidence handling.
- Inter-agency: joint drills with the forest and mining departments and intelligence sharing.
- Integrity and resilience: case studies on resisting political pressure, whistle-blower channels, stress management and insurance for families of officers in high-risk postings.
How this answer will be evaluated
Framework: GS4 Ethical Dilemma Framework (Crux, Stakeholders, Dilemmas, Options, Course of Action)
What earns full marks: Comprehensive options, nuanced evaluation of trade-offs, clear ethical hierarchy, and actionable training suggestions.
Evaluation rubric
Each sub-part is marked on its own, against the marks and word limit printed on the paper.
- (a) List distinct courses of action available to Ashok.
enumerate— list the items in order → one line each → no commentary
Must cover
- Publish report via electronic media
- Hand over report to CMD
- Resign from the channel
- Report to higher authorities (Press Council/Police)
Loses marks
- Listing vague options like 'think more'
- Missing the option to resign
Earns more
- Mentioning legal action against CMD
- Whistleblowing to media ombudsman
Extra mark
- Citing specific media ethics code
- (b) Assess pros and cons of each option identified in (a).
critically evaluate— positives → negatives/limits → conditions/safeguards → conclusion
Must cover
- Publishing: Upholds truth but risks job/safety
- Handing over: Secures loan/job but betrays public trust
- Resigning: Preserves integrity but loses livelihood
- Reporting: Seeks institutional justice but may be ignored
Loses marks
- One-sided evaluation without trade-offs
- Ignoring the financial pressure (loan) in evaluation
Earns more
- Linking 'handing over' to complicity in corruption
- Noting 'resigning' as a moral but practical loss
Extra mark
- Reference to 'duty of care' vs 'duty to truth'
- (c) Identify the specific ethical conflicts Ashok faces.
highlight— name the salient points → one line of substance each → close
Must cover
- Public interest vs. personal financial security
- Professional duty (journalism) vs. personal duty (son's health)
- Loyalty to employer vs. loyalty to truth
- Fear of political retribution vs. moral courage
Loses marks
- Generic dilemmas not specific to the case
- Missing the personal vs. professional conflict
Earns more
- Conflict of interest (CMD's stake in channel)
- Pressure of 'soft loan' as a trap
Extra mark
- Mentioning 'moral hazard' of the CMD
- (d) Select the best option and provide reasoned justification.
justify— claim → 3-4 reasons → evidence → conclusion
Must cover
- Selection of a specific option (e.g., publish or resign)
- Reasoning based on 'higher right' (public trust)
- Addressing the financial issue (e.g., seek help elsewhere)
- Balancing personal safety with professional duty
Loses marks
- Choosing to hand over the report
- Justification based only on self-interest
Earns more
- Suggesting a 'whistleblower' approach if publishing is unsafe
- Prioritizing the 'public good' over 'personal gain'
Extra mark
- Citing a specific journalist's example of integrity
- (e) Propose training measures for police in mining districts.
suggest— the problem in one line → implementable measures → who acts → conclusion
Must cover
- Ethical training to resist political pressure
- Legal training on mining laws and FIR procedures
- Physical/defensive training for high-risk encounters
- Stress management and psychological support
Loses marks
- Suggesting only physical training
- Ignoring the 'political pressure' aspect
Earns more
- Training on digital evidence collection
- Mentorship programs for young officers
Extra mark
- Reference to specific police training academy modules
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.
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 →More from General Studies 2022 GS Paper IV
- Q6 (a) Whistle-blower, who reports corruption and illegal activities, wrongdoing and miscond…
- Q7 Prabhat was working as Vice President (Marketing) at Sterling Electric Ltd., a reputed mu…
- Q8 Ramesh is State Civil Services Officer who got the opportunity of getting posted to the c…
- Q9 The Supreme Court has banned mining in the Aravalli Hills to stop degradation of the fore…
- Q10 You have done MBA from a reputed institution three years back but could not get campus pl…
- Q11 Rakesh was working as Joint Commissioner in Transport Department of a city. As a part of…
- Q12 You are appointed as an officer heading the section in Environment Pollution Control Boar…