Public Administration 2023 Paper II 50 marks 150 words Compulsory Comment

Q1

Answer the following in about 150 words each : 10×5=50 (a) "Kautilya's Arthashastra is a theoretical work on the State and Statecraft." Comment. 10 (b) Critics, sometimes, argue that bureaucracy is an impediment to a nation's development. Analyse. 10 (c) The Ninety-First Constitutional Amendment Act successfully right-sized the Council of Ministers both at Union and State levels. Comment. 10 (d) Is it true that the Finance Commission has been lending financial strength to the local bodies in India ? Argue in favour of your response. 10 (e) "Parliamentary democracy in India envisages elected head as the real executive of a State." Discuss. 10

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

निम्नलिखित में से प्रत्येक का लगभग 150 शब्दों में उत्तर दीजिए : (a) "कौटिल्य का अर्थशास्त्र राज्य एवं शासनकला पर एक सैद्धांतिक कृति है ।" टिप्पणी कीजिए । 10 (b) आलोचक कभी-कभी तर्क करते हैं कि नौकरशाही राष्ट्र के विकास में बाधक होती है । विश्लेषण कीजिए । 10 (c) इक्यानवें संविधानिक संशोधन अधिनियम ने केन्द्र तथा राज्य, दोनों स्तरों पर, मंत्रिपरिषद् के आकार को सफलतापूर्वक सही बना दिया है । टिप्पणी कीजिए । 10 (d) क्या यह सही है कि वित्त आयोग भारत में स्थानीय निकायों को वित्तीय मजबूती प्रदान कर रहा है ? अपने उत्तर के लिए तर्क दीजिए । 10 (e) "भारतीय संसदीय लोकतंत्र निर्वाचित प्रमुख को ही राज्य की वास्तविक कार्यपालिका के रूप में परिकल्पित करता है ।" विवेचन कीजिए । 10

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2023 Public Administration questions

Directive word: Comment

This question asks you to comment. 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

This multi-part question requires balanced treatment of five 10-mark sub-parts within 150 words each. For (a) 'Comment' demands balanced evaluation of Arthashastra's theoretical vs. practical nature; (b) 'Analyse' requires systematic examination of bureaucracy-development tension; (c) 'Comment' needs assessment of 91st Amendment's effectiveness; (d) requires argued position on Finance Commission's role; (e) 'Discuss' needs examination of CM's executive primacy. Allocate approximately 25-28 minutes total, with 5-6 minutes per sub-part, ensuring each response has a brief introduction, analytical body, and concluding observation.

Key points expected

  • (a) Arthashastra: Balanced view recognizing both theoretical framework (Saptanga theory, Mandala system) and practical administrative manual (espionage, revenue, law enforcement); mention Kautilya as political realist not pure theorist
  • (b) Bureaucracy: Analysis of Weberian vs. developmental critique; red tape, procedural delays vs. developmental role (NITI Aayog, District Collectors in disaster management); need for New Public Management reforms
  • (c) 91st Amendment: Article 75(1A) and 164(1A) fixing Council of Ministers size at 15% of LS/Assembly strength; assessment of success (reduced jumbo cabinets) vs. limitations (continued ministerial proliferation through MoS status, bypassing spirit)
  • (d) Finance Commission: Evolution from 73rd/74th Amendments (Article 280(3)(bb) and (c)); 13th-15th FC recommendations for PRIs/ULBs; limitations (untied funds, state-level devolution bottlenecks, own revenue constraints)
  • (e) Parliamentary democracy: Article 163-164 making CM real executive; Governor's nominal position; cabinet collective responsibility; contrast with presidential system; coalition complexities affecting CM authority

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Concept correctness20%10Precise identification of core concepts: for (a) Saptanga theory and Mandala system; for (b) Weberian ideal type vs. developmental bureaucracy; for (c) exact constitutional provisions (91st Amendment, 15% ceiling); for (d) Article 280(3)(bb) and (c) distinction; for (e) Articles 163-164 and 74/75 relationships. No factual errors in constitutional provisions.Generally correct concepts with minor inaccuracies (e.g., confusing 91st with 73rd/74th Amendments, vague reference to 'Finance Commission for panchayats' without Article specificity, conflating CM's real executive status with Governor's constitutional position).Significant conceptual errors: treating Arthashastra as purely theoretical without practical dimensions, misstating 91st Amendment provisions, claiming Finance Commission directly funds local bodies, or asserting Governor as real executive.
Theoretical anchor20%10Appropriate theoretical frameworks: for (a) Boesche/Rangarajan on Kautilya's realism; for (b) Weber's ideal type, Riggs' prismatic model, or NPM theories; for (c) Downsizing theory, Good Governance; for (d) Fiscal federalism, Oates' decentralization theorem; for (e) Westminster model, cabinet vs. presidential systems. Explicit mention of theorists where relevant.Implicit theoretical understanding without explicit naming; general references to 'ancient Indian political thought,' 'bureaucratic theory,' or 'federalism' without specific theoretical anchors.Absence of theoretical grounding; purely descriptive answers without analytical framework; inappropriate theories (e.g., applying Marxist analysis to Arthashastra without nuance).
Indian administrative examples20%10Specific, contemporary Indian examples: for (a) comparison with Manusmriti or Arthashastra's influence on Mauryan administration; for (b) IAS role in PMGYS, disaster response (Kerala floods), or Digital India; for (c) pre-2004 jumbo cabinets vs. post-amendment practice (e.g., Maharashtra 2019); for (d) 15th FC health grants, disaster mitigation funds to PRIs; for (e) coalition CMs (Kumaraswamy, Uddhav Thackeray) vs. dominant party CMs.Generic references without specificity: 'ancient Indian administration,' 'red tape in India,' 'Finance Commission gives money to panchayats,' 'CM is powerful' without illustrating through concrete instances.No Indian examples; irrelevant foreign comparisons (e.g., US bureaucracy for part b without Indian contrast); anachronistic examples (pre-1991 era without relevance).
Reform / policy angle20%10Critical assessment of reforms and contemporary relevance: for (a) Arthashastra's contemporary utility in strategic studies; for (b) LPG reforms, Mission Karmayogi, lateral entry; for (c) 91st Amendment's partial success, need for further reforms (fixed cabinet size regardless of legislature strength); for (d) 15th FC innovations (performance-based grants), unresolved issues (own revenue, GST impact); for (e) anti-defection law's impact on CM authority, need for gubernatorial reform.Mention of reforms without critical evaluation; descriptive listing of amendments or policies without assessing effectiveness or gaps.No reform dimension; purely historical or descriptive treatment; opposition to all reforms without constructive alternatives.
Conclusion & forward look20%10Synthesized, forward-looking conclusions for each sub-part: for (a) Arthashastra as theory-practice synthesis relevant for strategic autonomy; for (b) balanced verdict on bureaucracy as necessary but needing transformation; for (c) qualified success requiring stricter enforcement; for (d) Finance Commission as necessary but insufficient condition for local body empowerment; for (e) CM authority contingent on political circumstances, needing institutional safeguards. Each conclusion flows logically from analysis.Generic conclusions restating points; no clear position on debated issues; missing forward look or recommendations.No conclusion; abrupt ending; contradictory conclusions not supported by analysis; purely opinion-based without analytical foundation.

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 2023 Paper II