Public Administration 2025 Paper I 50 marks Explain

Q4

(a) "Delegated legislation should be clear and should confine to the limits determined by the legislature." In light of the statement explain how misuse of administrative discretion can be checked? (20 marks) (b) Leadership is not only about taking credit for success but also owning up and being accountable for failures. Elucidate. (15 marks) (c) Bureaucracy constitutes the imaginary state and is the spiritualism of the State. Explain. (15 marks)

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

(a) "प्रत्यायोजित विधान सुस्पष्ट और विधायिका द्वारा निर्धारित सीमाओं के अन्तर्गत होना चाहिए ।" उपर्युक्त कथन के प्रकाश में व्याख्या कीजिए कि किस प्रकार प्रशासनिक स्वविवेक के दुरुपयोग को नियंत्रित किया जा सकता है ? (20 अंक) (b) नेतृत्व न केवल सफलताओं का श्रेय लेना है बल्कि असफलताओं को स्वीकार करना और उसके प्रति उत्तरदायी होना भी है । स्पष्ट कीजिए । (15 अंक) (c) नौकरशाही काल्पनिक राज्य है और वह राज्य का आध्यात्मिकबाद है । व्याख्या कीजिए । (15 अंक)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2025 Public Administration questions

Directive word: Explain

This question asks you to explain. 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 'explain' demands conceptual clarity with cause-effect reasoning across all three parts. Allocate approximately 40% of time/words to part (a) given its 20 marks, and 30% each to parts (b) and (c). Structure: brief introduction framing the interconnected themes of accountability in governance; body addressing each sub-part sequentially with theoretical foundations and Indian illustrations; conclusion synthesizing how delegated discretion, leadership accountability, and bureaucratic ethos together strengthen democratic governance.

Key points expected

  • Part (a): Meaning of delegated legislation, reasons for growth (complexity, urgency, expertise), and constitutional basis under Articles 13(3) and 123/213; mechanisms to check misuse—procedural (laying before Parliament, consultation), substantive (ultra vires doctrine, Wednesbury reasonableness), and judicial (judicial review, writ jurisdiction)
  • Part (a): Specific checks—Scrutiny Committees (Lok Sabha's Committee on Subordinate Legislation), requirement of 'policy and standards' in parent Act per Krishna Bus case, and post-2014 PREVENTIVE framework through better rule-making procedures
  • Part (b): Distinction between transactional leadership (credit-taking) and transformational/ethical leadership (accountability for failures); theories—Burns' transformational leadership, Heifetz's adaptive leadership, and Bennis on authentic leadership
  • Part (b): Indian illustrations—civil servant accountability under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, RTI Act 2005's transparency mandate, and recent examples of bureaucratic accountability (post-disaster responsibility, COVID-19 management accountability)
  • Part (c): Hegelian interpretation—bureaucracy as 'universal class' representing general interest against particular interests; Marx's critique in 'Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right' where bureaucracy becomes 'imaginary state' due to separation from civil society and self-serving corporatism
  • Part (c): Weber's ideal-type bureaucracy as rational-legal alternative to patrimonialism; Indian context—steel frame continuity, neutrality dilemma, and 2nd ARC recommendations on reinvigorating bureaucratic ethos through RTI, citizen charters, and e-governance

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Concept correctness20%10Precisely defines delegated legislation with constitutional provisions (Articles 13, 123, 213); accurately distinguishes administrative discretion from arbitrary power; correctly interprets Hegel's 'imaginary state' and Marx's critique without conflating with Weberian bureaucracy; for (b), clearly differentiates accountability from responsibilityBasic definitions present but conflates delegated legislation with executive legislation; vague on Hegel-Marx distinction; treats leadership accountability generically without theoretical grounding; minor errors in constitutional articlesConfuses delegated legislation with separation of powers; misinterprets 'imaginary state' as fictional bureaucracy; conflates accountability with answerability; fundamental conceptual errors across all three parts
Theoretical anchor20%10For (a): cites Dicey's rule of law, Wade on administrative law, and Davis' discretion justice; for (b): employs Burns, Heifetz, or Bennis with precision; for (c): accurately deploys Hegel's Philosophy of Right, Marx's critique, and Weber's Economy and Society showing intellectual lineageMentions theories superficially without elaboration; mixes up theorists' core arguments; for (c), cites Weber but misses Hegel-Marx dialectic; adequate but not rigorous theoretical engagementNo theorist names or gross misattribution; for (c), completely misses Marx's critique of Hegel; generic statements without theoretical foundation; absent or incorrect theoretical framework
Indian administrative examples20%10For (a): cites specific cases (A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India, Krishna Bus Service) and Lok Sabha Committee on Subordinate Legislation functioning; for (b): references RTI disclosures, disaster management accountability (e.g., Bhopal gas tragedy aftermath), or recent bureaucratic resignations/taking responsibility; for (c): illustrates with IAS neutrality debates, steel frame legacy, or 2nd ARC Report on 'Ethics in Governance'Generic references to Parliament or judiciary without specificity; vague mention of RTI or 2nd ARC without connecting to question; examples present but not tightly linked to theoretical pointsNo Indian examples or irrelevant ones; misses constitutional and institutional context entirely; examples factually incorrect or anachronistic
Reform / policy angle20%10For (a): discusses Pre-Legislative Consultation Policy 2014, Regulatory Impact Assessment, and sunset clauses in delegated legislation; for (b): connects to Lokpal Act, RTI amendments, or proposed accountability legislation; for (c): links to Mission Karmayogi, lateral entry debates, or civil service reforms; shows awareness of contemporary reform discourseMentions 2nd ARC generically; some reform awareness but not contemporary; for (a), procedural checks listed without policy innovation; adequate but not forward-lookingNo reform discussion or outdated references only; misses contemporary significance; fails to connect historical analysis to present governance challenges
Conclusion & forward look20%10Synthesizes all three parts into coherent argument about democratic accountability—how controlled discretion (a), accountable leadership (b), and public-spirited bureaucracy (c) together enable good governance; ends with specific forward-looking recommendation (e.g., Administrative Reforms Commission revival, ethics infrastructure, or AI-assisted legislative scrutiny)Summarizes each part separately without synthesis; generic conclusion on good governance; some forward look but not specific or actionableNo conclusion or mere repetition of points; abrupt ending; no forward look or entirely generic closing statement

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 2025 Paper I