(a) Dr. Ambedkar's idea of social justice leads to 'egalitarian justice' as compared to Rawls' 'justice as fairness' which aims at the notion of 'pure procedural justice'. Comment. (20 marks)
(b) "The Panchayats with Gram Sabhas should be so organise

Question

(a) Dr. Ambedkar's idea of social justice leads to 'egalitarian justice' as compared to Rawls' 'justice as fairness' which aims at the notion of 'pure procedural justice'. Comment. (20 marks)
(b) "The Panchayats with Gram Sabhas should be so organised as to identify the resources locally available for the development in agricultural and industrial sectors." Examine the statement in the context of Gram Swaraj. (15 marks)
(c) Examine the entitlement theory of justice. (15 marks)

UPSC Answer Check · Accepted Answer

The question demands a 'comment' for part (a) and 'examine' for parts (b) and (c). Allocate approximately 40% of time/words to part (a) given its 20 marks, and 30% each to parts (b) and (c). Structure: brief comparative introduction → systematic treatment of each sub-part with clear sub-headings → integrated conclusion linking social justice theories to contemporary Indian governance challenges.
- Part (a): Distinguish Ambedkar's 'egalitarian justice' (substantive equality, annihilation of caste, state intervention) from Rawls' 'justice as fairness' (original position, veil of ignorance, pure procedural justice); explain why Ambedkar rejects formal equality
- Part (a): Analyze Ambedkar's critique of graded inequality in Hindu social order versus Rawls' focus on distributive justice within liberal framework; reference 'Annihilation of Caste' and 'A Theory of Justice'
- Part (b): Explain Gram Swaraj as Gandhi's concept of self-sufficient village republics; examine how Panchayats with Gram Sabhas operationalize this through 73rd Constitutional Amendment
- Part (b): Analyze the resource identification mandate—local agricultural (soil, water, livestock) and industrial (khadi, village industries) resources; cite examples like Kerala's People's Plan Campaign or MGNREGA resource mapping
- Part (c): Examine Robert Nozick's entitlement theory—principles of justice in acquisition, transfer, and rectification; contrast with patterned theories of justice
- Part (c): Critically evaluate entitlement theory's minimal state implications and relevance to Indian context—land acquisition debates, tribal rights, and critiques from Amartya Sen's capability approach

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Demand-directive understanding	20%	10	For (a), 'comment' is executed as balanced critical comparison, not mere description; for (b) and (c), 'examine' is fulfilled through systematic probing of assumptions and implications, not just explanation; clear distinction between directive demands across sub-parts	Basic adherence to directives but (a) becomes descriptive comparison without critical edge; (b) and (c) remain explanatory without sufficient critical examination; some confusion between 'comment' and 'examine'	Misreads directives—treats 'comment' as opinion or 'examine' as simple description; no differentiation in approach across sub-parts; ignores comparative dimension in (a)
Content depth & accuracy	20%	10	Precise exposition of Ambedkar's substantive equality vs. Rawls' procedural fairness; accurate detailing of 73rd Amendment provisions for Gram Swaraj; nuanced presentation of Nozick's three principles of entitlement with philosophical grounding	Generally accurate but superficial—broad statements about Ambedkar and Rawls without textual grounding; generic description of Panchayati Raj without Gram Swaraj-Gandhian linkage; basic outline of entitlement theory without rectification principle	Factual errors—confuses Rawls with Nozick, misrepresents Ambedkar's constitutionalism, conflates Gram Swaraj with mere decentralization; significant gaps in entitlement theory coverage
Structure & flow	20%	10	Clear tripartite structure with distinct sub-headings; seamless transitions between philosophical (a), institutional (b), and theoretical (c) dimensions; integrated conclusion synthesizing all three parts into coherent argument on justice and governance	Identifiable parts but uneven development—(a) overextended at expense of (c); some transitions between sub-parts; conclusion addresses parts separately without synthesis	Disorganized or merged parts without demarcation; no logical progression; missing introduction or conclusion; disproportionate allocation—neglects 20-mark (a) or overwrites 15-mark sections
Examples / case-law / data	20%	10	For (a): Ambedkar's 'Annihilation of Caste' (1936), Poona Pact; Rawls' original position specifics; for (b): 73rd Amendment Articles 243-243O, Kerala People's Plan Campaign, Rajasthan's MKSS experience; for (c): Nozick's 'Anarchy, State and Utopia', Indian land acquisition cases (Singur, Nandigram), Sen's critique	Some relevant examples but limited specificity—mentions Panchayati Raj without Amendment details, vague reference to Gandhi's village ideal, general awareness of Nozick without textual citation	Minimal or irrelevant examples; no constitutional provisions cited; no engagement with primary texts; examples from unrelated domains (international relations, ancient history)
Conclusion & analytical edge	20%	10	Synthesizes three strands: argues how Ambedkar's substantive justice necessitates institutional mechanisms like Gram Swaraj, while entitlement theory alerts us to rights violations in state-led redistribution; evaluates contemporary relevance—whether 73rd Amendment realizes Ambedkarite goals or Nozickian constraints	Separate summaries for each part without integration; generic statement on importance of social justice; no evaluative stance on competing theories	No conclusion or abrupt ending; mere repetition of points; no analytical engagement with tensions between theories (procedural vs. substantive, individual rights vs. collective welfare)

(a) Dr. Ambedkar's idea of social justice leads to 'egalitarian justice' as compared to Rawls' 'justice as fairness' which aims…

Directive word: Comment

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

Key points expected

Evaluation rubric

Practice this exact question

More from Political Science & IR 2022 Paper I