Public Administration 2021 Paper II 50 marks 150 words Compulsory Examine

Q5

Answer the following in about 150 words each: (a) No rural development strategy can succeed unless it is complemented by appropriate Panchayati Raj Institutions. Examine the statement. (10 marks) (b) NITI Aayog has been constituted to implement the goal of co-operative federalism. Discuss. (10 marks) (c) Responsibility and accountability are two major goals of Good Governance. Discuss the statement in the context of Indian administration. (10 marks) (d) The Prime Minister's Office has become a powerful institution in itself by virtue of its role in decision-making on strategic issues of utmost importance. Examine the statement. (10 marks) (e) Well planned and goal oriented training programmes are the backbone of the civil service system in India. Examine the statement. (10 marks)

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

निम्नलिखित में से प्रत्येक का लगभग 150 शब्दों में उत्तर दीजिये। (a) ग्रामीण विकास की कोई भी रणनीति तब तक सफल नहीं हो सकती जब तक कि वह उपयुक्त पंचायती राज संस्थाओं से अनुपूरित नहीं हो। इस कथन का परीक्षण कीजिये। (10 अंक) (b) नीति आयोग का गठन सहकारी संघवाद के महत्वपूर्ण उद्देश्य को क्रियान्वित करने के लिये किया गया है। विवेचना कीजिये। (10 अंक) (c) उत्तरदायित्व तथा जवाबदेहीता सुशासन के दो प्रमुख लक्ष्य हैं। भारतीय प्रशासन के संदर्भ में इस कथन की विवेचना कीजिये। (10 अंक) (d) अत्यंत महत्व के सामरिक मुद्दों पर निर्णय निर्माण में भूमिका के संदर्भ में प्रधानमंत्री कार्यालय अपने आप में एक सशक्त संस्था बन गया है। इस कथन का परीक्षण कीजिये। (10 अंक) (e) सुनियोजित और उद्देश्योन्मुखी प्रशिक्षण कार्यक्रम भारत में सिविल सेवा व्यवस्था की रीढ़ की हड्डी है। इस कथन का परीक्षण कीजिये। (10 अंक)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2021 Public Administration questions

Directive word: Examine

This question asks you to 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 critical examination across five sub-parts, requiring balanced treatment of each 10-mark section within ~150 words each. For (a), examine the symbiotic relationship between PRIs and rural development; for (b), discuss NITI Aayog's federalism mandate; for (c), analyse responsibility-accountability dynamics; for (d), evaluate PMO's institutional evolution; for (e), assess training's systemic role. Structure each part with brief context, dual-sided analysis, and a crisp conclusion—allocate roughly equal time and words across parts, prioritising analytical depth over description.

Key points expected

  • (a) PRIs as institutional backbone: 73rd Amendment provisions, Article 243G functions, PESA for tribal areas, success stories like Kerala's People's Plan Campaign vs. challenges of devolution deficits
  • (b) NITI Aayog's cooperative federalism: replacement of Planning Commission's one-way flow, Governing Council structure, SDG verticals, limitations in resource allocation (no financial powers)
  • (c) Responsibility-accountability nexus: distinction between answerability (responsibility) and enforceability (accountability), RTI, Citizen's Charter, Lokpal, political vs. administrative accountability
  • (d) PMO's power accretion: from Nehru's small secretariat to current 'super cabinet' status, nuclear command, economic reforms coordination, institutional tension with Cabinet Secretariat
  • (e) Training as systemic backbone: Kothari Committee recommendations, Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy, Mission Karmayogi, competency framework, gaps in mid-career training
  • (f) Cross-cutting governance theme: convergence of decentralisation, federalism, accountability, executive coordination, and human resource development as pillars of administrative reform

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Concept correctness20%10Precise definitions: for (a) distinguishes PRIs from traditional bureaucracy; (b) contrasts cooperative vs. competitive federalism; (c) separates responsibility (obligation to act) from accountability (answerability for outcomes); (d) identifies PMO's constitutional non-status vs. actual power; (e) distinguishes pre-service, in-service, and mid-career training—no conflation of termsBasic definitions present but some conflation (e.g., treating responsibility and accountability as synonymous, or equating NITI Aayog with Planning Commission's functions)Fundamental conceptual errors: misidentifying PMO as constitutional body, confusing NITI Aayog's advisory role with financial authority, or treating training as mere skill acquisition without systemic linkage
Theoretical anchor20%10Appropriate theoretical frameworks: for (a) Lippit's 'participation-development' thesis or UNCDF's local governance model; (b) Watts' cooperative federalism or S.R. Bommai principles; (c) UNDP's governance indicators or Klitgaard's corruption formula; (d) Hargrove's 'presidentialisation' of PMO or B.D. Graham's core executive analysis; (e) Argyris-Schön's double-loop learning or Kothari's administrative reform theoryMentions relevant thinkers or committees without systematic application—e.g., names Balwantrai Mehta or Ashok Mehta but doesn't explain their theoretical relevance to current PRIsNo theoretical grounding; purely descriptive answers or irrelevant theories (e.g., applying Marxist state theory to PMO without justification, or using generic management theories without administrative context)
Indian administrative examples20%10Specific, current examples: (a) Kerala's People's Plan, Odisha's Mission Shakti; (b) Aspirational Districts Programme, SDG India Index; (c) Sevottam model, CPGRAMS, Social Audit in MGNREGA; (d) PMO's role in COVID-19 management, G20 coordination, nuclear doctrine; (e) Mission Karmayogi, iGOT platform, district training programmes—examples span central, state, and local levelsGeneric references without specificity—e.g., 'RTI helps accountability' without naming Section 4 disclosures, or 'training is important' without naming any institution beyond 'LBSNAA'Outdated or incorrect examples: citing dissolved bodies (Planning Commission functions), misattributing schemes (confusing NITI Aayog initiatives with Ministry programmes), or purely theoretical answers without Indian administrative context
Reform / policy angle20%10Critical evaluation of reforms: (a) 2nd ARC recommendations on PRIs, Finance Commission devolution; (b) 15th Finance Commission's local body grants, critique of NITI Aayog's lack of funds; (c) proposed amendments to Prevention of Corruption Act, administrative tribunals reform; (d) proposals for PMO-Cabinet Secretariat demarcation; (e) National Training Policy implementation gaps—includes both achievements and structural limitationsLists reforms without critical assessment—e.g., mentions 73rd Amendment without noting implementation gaps, or praises NITI Aayog without noting its resource constraints compared to Planning CommissionNo reform dimension; purely static description of institutions, or uncritical celebration of government initiatives without acknowledging implementation challenges or alternative models
Conclusion & forward look20%10Synthesised conclusions for each sub-part with forward-looking prescriptions: (a) need for activity mapping completion; (b) NITI 2.0 with financial teeth; (c) digital accountability platforms; (d) institutionalised PMO-Cabinet balance; (e) outcome-based training evaluation—demonstrates interlinkages between the five themes as components of governance transformationGeneric conclusions repeating introduction points—e.g., 'PRIs are important and should be strengthened' without specific actionable recommendations or integration across sub-partsMissing conclusions, abrupt endings, or purely summarising without synthesis; no forward look or fails to address the 'examine'/'discuss' directive's requirement for balanced judgment

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 →

More from Public Administration 2021 Paper II