CASE STUDIES – ANSWERS (Brijendra Singh)

Case No. 1
Cheating is immoral, unethical and illegal. Hence, it is my duty to ensure that my friend
does not cheat any more. Moreover, since he has already cheated a lot, his actions
must be reported to the invigilator immediately.
I certainly cannot ignore the matter, since that would amount to abetting in an offence
that gives my friend an unfair advantage over all the other candidates in the exam. It is
the duty of the invigilator to prevent students from cheating, but the responsibility has
to be shared by everyone in the exam hall, including the students. Ignoring the matter
would be akin to not reporting a theft merely because it is the policeman‟s duty to stop
it.
Similarly, if our friendship is worth preserving, it will not only survive but should
become stronger. My friend will understand that by reporting him, I am trying to ensure
his welfare above all else. In the short-term, I am saving him from potential
punishment and disgrace. In the long-term, I am ensuring that such tendencies do not
become a habit for him. A case in point is the friendship of Karna and Duryodhana in
the epic Mahabharata. Despite recognising that Duryodhana was wrong, Karna
supported him blindly, merely because they were good friends. This tacit approval led
to the destruction of an entire dynasty.
Hence, I would certainly report the matter. However, after the exam, I would explain
my reasons to my friend and assure him that I stand by him, to help him in any manner
possible, be it academic or financial.
(260 words)

1
Case No. 2
My duty as the Qualify Control Officer is to maintain the integrity of the acquisition
process. What my friend is proposing amounts to a dereliction of my duties. Hence, I
would certainly refuse his offer.
I would justify my stand by considering the following factors:
i) Accepting his offer would signify favouritism and imply a misuse of the discretionary
powers vested in me. This is not only discriminatory towards other companies but can
also cause a potential breach in national security.
ii) If the quality and pricing of his company‟s instruments is better than any of the
competitors, he should not even need my intervention. He should be able to secure
the orders on merit in the open bidding process.
iii) This is not an opportunity to compromise on my principles and professional ethics
but to help my friend realise the error of his ways and, if possible, to correct him.
If my friend respects my point of view, I would let him off with a warning to not repeat
such behaviour in the future. If he persists further, I would have no option but to have
him booked for trying to bribe a govt. official.
Further, even after he withdraws his offer to me, I would enquire if the information
about the govt. signing the defence procurement deal is available in public domain. If
not, I would recommend an investigation into the same, to ensure that his company
hasn‟t corrupted any other officials.
(245 words)

2
Case No. 3
The case involves a conflict between Ram‟s duties towards his family on the hand and
towards a fellow human being on the other. Ram must certainly do his duty as a good
human being and help the victim. It is not an easy decision to take, especially when his
family‟s fortunes depend upon his employment. But it is vital that Ram understands
that should he ignore the victim, even if he secures the job offer, he will never be able
to erase the guilt of have built his career at the expense of someone‟s life.
Therefore, Ram must uphold values such as empathy and compassion and help the
victim. His action would also be consistent with Immanuel Kant‟s categorical
imperative, which urges us to treat people as an end, never as a means to an end.
Ram must do for the victim what he would expect the victim to do for him, if the
situation was reversed.
Any hesitation Ram may have with regard to missing the interview can be addressed
by realising that whoever is conducting the interview would recognise that by showing
this willingness to sacrifice his personal welfare for a stranger, Ram has provided a
better testament to his character than any interview can possibly assess. This very
action makes him an ideal member of any team or organisation.
Further, should the firm reject his candidature despite knowing about the reason, Ram
can take solace in the fact that he would not have been at peace working in a firm
where even such fundamental humanitarian values are not appreciated.
(260 words)

3
Case No. 4

My duty as Principal of the college is to maintain its reputation and educational quality,
which depends upon the quality of its professors. The request by the PS amounts to a
quid pro quo, making the release of the funds contingent upon an unfair intervention in
the selection process.

The options available to me are:

i) Accede to the PS‟s request, since the funds would ensure the greater good of the
institute.
ii) Deny his request and risk further delay in the release of funds.
iii) Approach other functionaries and seek their intervention.

The easiest option is to accede to the request. But this is potentially disastrous
because:

i) It sets a poor precedent. Such requests may become more frequent in the future.
ii) It would dishearten other professors who have earned their posts by dint of hard
work.
iii) It jeopardizes the future of the students, if the professor is not competent.

Therefore, I would uphold the integrity of the process and not entertain this request.
However, I would assure the PS that this candidate would be given a fair chance like
all others. If he does not get selected, I can offer to personally assist him in preparing
better for future interviews.

If the PS threatens me with unreasonable impediments in the allocation of funds, I

would approach the Cabinet Minister and request him to stop such arm-twisting
tactics.

If even this does not work, I will have to take formal recourse through appropriate legal
and institutional channels. There is a likelihood that the funds may be delayed, but
they certainly cannot be denied.

(265 words)

4
Case No. 5

The case involves an apparent conflict between Ms. A‟s professional duties towards
her company on the one hand and her fiduciary duties towards the public at large on
the other. However, the conflict can be resolved by recognising that public welfare
should always take first priority. Hence, she must report the matter to the authorities.

Ms. A may have apprehensions about this decision if she considers the impact on the
company‟s financial health and the implications for her family if she is fired. She may
even try to downplay the potential adverse effects of the waste discharge to justify her
fears. But then she should also keep in the mind the case of Union Carbide in Bhopal,
where the company‟s failure to address visible symptoms led to the largest industrial
disaster the world has ever seen.

Therefore, she must understand that the company‟s reasoning regarding the costs of a
proper waste disposal mechanism is flawed: in a trade-off between environment and
money, environment should always come first. On a personal level, she must have the
moral courage to do what she knows to be right-silence on her part would make her an
equally guilty accomplice to any environmental and human costs that may arise.

Further, any apprehensions she may have regarding her job can be addressed by
suggesting cost-effective waste disposal systems to the management. Finally, even if
the management disregards her suggestions and fires her, she can always seek
employment in another firm rather than continuing to work in a firm where she is bound
to suffer cognitive dissonance because of the mismatch between her personal values
and the company‟s values.
(270 words)

5
Case No. 6

The most important human right is the right to life. It is indeed our collective failure that
we have not been able to ensure quality medical care across society. Legally, we can
punish the boy for stealing the drugs but morally, we are then punishing him twice,
since to begin with he is a victim first.
The boy‟s „stealing‟ the life-saving drugs can certainly be considered illegal but it may
not be immoral in the true sense of the term. Stealing can be considered as immoral
when:
i) the principal motive is greed, envy or arrogance.
ii) the act is primarily voluntary in nature, that is out of choice.
But in the given case, the boy‟s act at the level of thought is not motivated by any
ignoble intent but with love and respect for human life. Hence, characterizing it as
immorality may not be prudent.
Since he has already committed the theft, the boy must hold himself legally liable for
the act. He should confess to the chemist and let the chemist decide whether to allow
him time to repay for the medicine or report him to the law enforcing authorities.
Ideally, the chemist would be expected empathize with the boy‟s predicament and
“hate the sin rather than the sinner”. Since the boy stole because of compelling
circumstances, it is important to give him a chance to repent for the same rather than
merely punishing him. As such, the chemist should allow the boy a chance to repay for
the medicine, in cash or in kind.
(255 words)

6
Case No. 7

The case involves a conflict of duties for the couple, towards the father and towards
the son. The family faces a constraint of finances, making it difficult to do justice to one
duty without compromising on the other. Therefore, it is not possible to prioritise one
over the other. Rather, the couple must display sound emotional control and balance
their duties towards both individuals.

Compelling arguments can be made in favour of both sides. The father has a
legitimate claim to the family‟s attention and financial resources, since he has raised,
educated and nurtured the husband. However, it is not certain how long he would stay
in the coma or whether he would ever recover from it. If the family income is drained
for his treatment without any meaningful improvement in his condition, it may seem
unfair to have denied the son access to the same resources, which he could have
used more beneficially.

On the other hand, choosing the son may enable the couple to fulfil their filial duties.
But this not only amounts to unjust behaviour towards the father, it also sets a poor
example for the son. Implicitly, he is being taught that our elders are not a priority for
us. Such poor socialisation is likely to damage his personality development.

Therefore, the family must try to balance their duties towards both. For this, they
should strive to augment their finances in a variety of ways such as seeking alternate
employment, cutting their expenses, applying for an educational loan or a scholarship
etc.
(255 words)

7
Case No. 8

The case involves a violation of the chain of command by the Tehsildars to complain
against the misbehaviour of their immediate superior. Such a violation can be
permitted in extenuating circumstances, provided the complaint is true. Since the
allegation has not been verified, my objective as the DM is to enquire into its veracity
before taking any action and simultaneously, ensure the smooth functioning of the
district administration.

All the given options have the same advantages- swift action and an seemingly prompt
resolution. However, they also have a common limitation- imposing a punishment
without establishing who is guilty. Therefore, I would begin by first asking the SDM
concerned why these allegations have surfaced. If he admits to misbehaviour, I can
enforce a proportionate penalty, whether a transfer or suspension.

If he maintains that he is innocent, I would look into the service records of all these
officials and consult my colleagues to ascertain whether any such matter has been
reported earlier. If even these efforts remain inconclusive, I would have to constitute
an enquiry committee.

While the committee is investigating, there is a possibility that the Tehsildars may
repeat their concerns of being unable to continue working. In such a situation, I would
sternly remind them that they are govt. officers and so, they must be professional in
their behaviour. Till the investigation is completed, they should coordinate and
cooperate with the SDM for the greater good of the general public.

Finally, I would also take steps in the future to improve the work culture and ensure
that such animosity between officials does not happen again.
(265 words)

8
Case No. 9

The case involves a serious, but unverified, allegation against a senior doctor. It also
signifies a poor work culture with the staff threating to strike during an epidemic. Thus,
as the Director, my twin objectives in this case are to firstly, ascertain the cause of the
tragedy and secondly, to maintain the smooth functioning of the hospital.

All the given options have the same advantages- prompt resolution and prevention of
the strike. However, they also have the following limitations:
i) As a cardiologist, I do not possess the required expertise in gynaecology. Further,
my personal involvement may create the suspicion of a bias.
ii) Taking penal action without verifying the cause would be unjust to the doctor and
would increase the possibility of a strike.
iii) Dismissing the family‟s concerns indicates partiality towards my staff and
increases the risk of malpractices in the future.

Therefore, I would begin by first meeting the doctor concerned and ask him to shed
light on the incident. If he admits to having erred, I can enforce the appropriate penalty
and also ask him to restrain the staff from going on strike.

If the meeting with him remains inconclusive, I would have to constitute an enquiry
committee. To ensure its fairness, it would be composed of experts who are not
working in this hospital. The committee would be asked to conduct its investigation in a
time-bound manner. If it is judicious, an autoposy could be used as prima facie
evidence to fast track the enquiry. Simultaneously, I would use the constitution of the
committee as an opportune moment to persuade the family to accept the body for the
last rites, assuring them that due diligence is being maintained in its working.

Finally, I would also take steps in the future to improve the work culture and ensure
that such insubordinate behaviour by the staff is not repeated.
(310 words)

9
Case No. 10

My objective as the DM is to resolve the traffic problems in a time-bound manner,

while simultaneously ensuring that public order is not disrupted. Some options to
handle the roundel with the temple are:
i) Relocating the temple at the govt.‟s expense.
ii) Alternate traffic infrastructure, such as a flyover or a road diversion.
iii) Deploying armed personnel to curb any agitations during the demolition.

Although appealing, none of these options is financially prudent, timely or a good

precedent. Since the temple has no archaeological value and is an encroachment on
public land, I would respect the recommendations of the expert committee and begin
with the demolition.

I would begin by issuing a public notice specifying the date of demolition and inviting
any objections towards the same. If there is no resistance, I would proceed with the
demolition.

If the perceived resistance seems strong, I would identify those who are most vocal in
their resistance and focus my authority on them. I would tell them that I am willing to
show leniency for encroaching on public land if they demolish /relocate the temple
voluntarily.

If they do not agree, I would use the CM‟s political influence to persuade them and
also incentivise their cooperation, for instance by giving subsidised land, funds for
construction etc. If the resistance still does not abate, I would have no option but to
consider alternate traffic infrastructure. This would impose a financial burden on the
State and set a poor precedent, but is the only remaining option to maintain public
safety.

Finally, I would ensure that any similar illegal encroachments in the city are identified
and addressed in time in the future.
(275 words)

10