Public Administration 2022 Paper II 50 marks Discuss

Q7

(a) In India, for the upliftment of majority of people, governmental intervention remains a central fact of life. Nevertheless, the effective implementation of policies depends on the ethical values of Public Servants. Discuss. 20 (b) Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) is today a primary cause of widespread and paralysing unwillingness on the part of government institutions to decide and act. Discuss. 20 (c) Do you think that the new localism relegate the spirit of 74th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1992 ? 10

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

(a) भारत में, बहुसंख्यक लोगों के उत्थान के लिए सरकारी हस्तक्षेप जीवन का एक केंद्रीय तथ्य बना हुआ है। फिर भी, नीतियों का प्रभावी क्रियान्वयन लोकसेवकों के नैतिक मूल्यों पर निर्भर करता है। विवेचन कीजिए। 20 (b) आज सरकारी संस्थानों की निर्णय लेने और कार्य करने की व्यापक एवं अंगघाती अनिच्छा की मुख्य वजह नियंत्रक एवं महालेखा परीक्षक है। विवेचन कीजिए। 20 (c) क्या आप सोचते हैं कि नवीन स्थानीयवाद 74वें संवैधानिक संशोधन अधिनियम, 1992 की भावना को निर्वासित करता है ? 10

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2022 Public Administration questions

Directive word: Discuss

This question asks you to discuss. 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 directive 'discuss' demands a balanced, multi-dimensional examination with arguments for and against. Allocate approximately 40% of time/words to part (a) on ethical values in policy implementation, 35% to part (b) on CAG's impact on decision-making, and 25% to part (c) on new localism versus 74th CAA spirit. Structure each part with brief introduction, body covering both dimensions of the debate, and a synthesised conclusion.

Key points expected

  • Part (a): Nexus between governmental intervention for social upliftment and ethical values of public servants — discuss how integrity, empathy, and commitment translate policy intent into outcomes; cite ARC recommendations on ethics in governance
  • Part (a): The 'implementation gap' — how lack of ethical values leads to corruption, nepotism, and policy failure despite well-designed schemes; reference RTI Act 2005 as accountability mechanism
  • Part (b): CAG's expanded mandate post-2014 (performance audit, environmental audit) and its chilling effect on decision-making — the 'fear of CAG' phenomenon among bureaucrats
  • Part (b): Counter-argument that CAG strengthens accountability and prevents malfeasance; reference 2G spectrum, coal block allocation cases where CAG acted as watchdog
  • Part (b): Need for balance between audit accountability and administrative risk-taking; mention Supreme Court observations on 'policy paralysis' versus 'vigilance overreach'
  • Part (c): 'New localism' (centralised urban missions like Smart Cities, AMRUT) versus 74th CAA's mandate of empowered urban local bodies with functional, financial, and administrative autonomy
  • Part (c): Whether mission-mode central schemes with SPVs dilute Ward Committees, Metropolitan Planning Committees, and direct election principles of 74th CAA; cite JNNURM to Smart Cities transition
  • Part (c): Synthesis — new localism as pragmatic adaptation versus constitutional subversion; recommend harmonisation through capacity building and fiscal devolution as per FC recommendations

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Concept correctness20%10Precisely defines ethical governance, CAG's constitutional position under Article 148, and 74th CAA's three-tier structure; accurately distinguishes between 'new localism' as centralised urban governance and 'genuine local self-government'; no conflation of CAG with CVC or LokpalBasic definitions present but some confusion between CAG's audit types or 73rd versus 74th Amendment provisions; treats 'new localism' vaguely without linking to specific central schemesFundamental errors — calls CAG an executive body, confuses 74th with 73rd Amendment, or misidentifies 'new localism' as decentralisation; conceptual confusion between ethics and legality
Theoretical anchor20%10Deploys Dwight Waldo on administrative ethics, Fred Riggs on prismatic society and implementation gaps, New Public Management accountability frameworks, and Sivaramakrishnan Committee on urban governance; for part (b), uses B.B. Schaffer's 'avoidance behaviour' or Klitgaard's corruption formulaMentions ARC reports or Second ARC on ethics without specific chapter references; generic reference to 'democratic decentralisation' without theoretical depth; limited engagement with audit-accountability tension literatureNo theoretical framework; relies on generalities like 'ethics is important' or 'CAG is good'; missing scholarly foundations for any of the three parts
Indian administrative examples20%10For (a): T.N. Seshan's electoral reforms, Ela Bhatt/SEWA model, or recent civil servant initiatives like 'Operation Sulaimani'; for (b): specific CAG reports (2G, Coalgate, Rafale) and their aftermath on bureaucratic behaviour; for (c): Smart Cities SPVs versus Bengaluru/ Mumbai municipal corporation powers, 15th Finance Commission urban recommendationsGeneric mention of MNREGA or Swachh Bharat for (a); only 2G case for (b) without analysis; Smart Cities named for (c) without explaining SPV structure; examples lack specificity or contemporary relevanceNo Indian examples or irrelevant foreign cases; or purely hypothetical illustrations; fails to cite any CAG report, constitutional provision, or urban governance scheme by name
Reform / policy angle20%10Proposes concrete reforms: for (a) — ethics committees in every department, lateral entry with ethical screening; for (b) — CAG's Audit Advisory Board mechanism, protection for 'bona fide' decisions under Prevention of Corruption Act amendments; for (c) — Model Municipal Law, own-source revenue enhancement, metropolitan governance revival per SivaramakrishnanVague suggestions like 'training should be improved' or 'CAG should be balanced'; recognises need for reform but offers no implementable mechanism; mentions 15th FC but not specific urban recommendationsNo reform suggestions or purely utopian ideas without administrative feasibility; opposes all change or supports status quo without justification; missing legal, institutional, or technological reform dimensions
Conclusion & forward look20%10Synthesises all three parts into coherent argument: ethical public service enables effective intervention, CAG accountability must coexist with decisional courage, and urban governance requires genuine federalism not centralised missions; ends with forward-looking vision of 'ethical, accountable, and empowered' administrative state; references SDG-16 or emerging challenges like climate governanceSeparate conclusions for each part without cross-linking; restates main points without synthesis; generic closing statement about 'good governance'Missing conclusion or abrupt ending; contradictory final statements; no connection between parts; purely descriptive closure without evaluative or prescriptive element

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 2022 Paper II