Revision summary
Life on the road outranks a personal interview slot. Stop, call 108/112, give competent first aid, and end the bystander freeze. Hand over to ambulance, then seek a delayed board with a true account. Do not invent a story or harvest the rescue for marks. A career cost is acceptable; a death ignored is not.
Model answer
Introduction
- The case is a collision of two goods: a once-in-a-cycle interview that can make a public career, and a stranger’s life that will not wait for a board. The ethical rank is clear. A future PCS officer who walks past a dying man to protect a score has already failed the service he seeks.
Body
Stakeholders and facts
- The elderly man in cardiac arrest or collapse, the grand-daughter who cannot carry him alone, and bystanders who may freeze.
- Myself as a candidate whose interview slot is near, and the UPPSC board that can be informed.
- The public interest in a civil service that values Article 21 over a personal timetable.
Ethical issues
- Right to life versus personal advancement: Kant forbids using the old man as a discarded means to my appointment.
- Virtue: courage and compassion are the interview’s real test, happening on the road.
- Justice: a child-carer in panic is the worst-off person in the scene; Rawls’s gaze falls on her.
- Integrity of the future office: the State will later ask this officer to stop for an accident; the habit starts now.
- Honesty later: if I help, I must not invent a fake medical story; if I am delayed, I tell the truth.
Options
- Ignore and run to the interview, telling myself that many others can help.
- Shout for help but do not stop, to keep my clothes and clock clean.
- Stop, call 108/112, begin CPR or recovery position if trained, send the child to flag a shop, ask a passer-by to film time and location for the Good Samaritan record, then proceed when a competent hand or ambulance has taken over.
- Miss the interview entirely without informing the Commission, which adds a new harm to my dependents without extra saving of life.
- Carry the man alone in a private car in a way that worsens injury, without calling emergency services.
Option I would choose
- I would stop immediately, call emergency services, give first aid I am competent to give, and recruit the crowd so that I am not a lone hero and not a passer-by.
- As soon as the man is with ambulance staff or a clearly competent helper, I would leave my name and number with the grand-daughter, photograph the ambulance slip if appropriate, and go to the interview or call the Commission’s control number en route to request a delayed slot, stating the facts without drama.
- I would not bargain with the child’s plea. Diffusion of responsibility (“someone else will”) is how Good Samaritans die in Indian streets.
- Missing a board is a recoverable administrative request; a death in front of me is not.
- If the board refuses a delay, I accept the career cost. That cost is the price of the character the PCS is supposed to buy.
Aftercare and truth
- Follow up with the family if possible; do not seek publicity as “the candidate who saved.”
- In the interview, if asked, narrate without self-praise; if not asked, do not use the event as a prepared anecdote to harvest marks.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD H[Heart attack on road] --> A[Aid 108 crowd] A --> T[Handover to ambulance] T --> I[Inform UPPSC delay] X[Walk past] --> F[Failed public ethic]
Conclusion
I would treat the heart attack as the primary file and the interview as the secondary one. Help, call 108, hand over, then tell UPPSC the truth and seek a delay. A PCS seat bought by abandoning a dying stranger is not an ethical appointment.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
It is often said that poverty leads to corruption. However, there are plenty of instances where affluent and powerful people indulge in corruption on a large scale. What are the main causes of corruption among people? Support your answer with examples.
Next question in the 2019 paper (Q16). View answer →
-
What if stopping means I lose the only interview chance this year?
Then I lose it. The service I want is a trust to save strangers. Walking past is a disqualification of character even if the marksheet is clean.
-
Should I put the man in my car and race to hospital?
Only if 108 is impossible and movement is advised; untrained dragging can kill. Call professionals first, then assist transport as they direct.
Same topic · past papers
UPPSC has asked this before
These previous-year questions sit on the same topic. Open one to practise the earlier ask.
More from this paper
Q1 · UPSC Mains 2019 · UPGS4 · 8 marks · Solution
What is ethics? Explain its role in human life.
Ethics and Human Interface
Ethics is systematic reflection on right, duty, and the good life, distinct from mere custom or statute. Aristotle, Kant, dharma, and Gandhi supply maps of habit, respect, role, and means. It guides choice when interest and fear pull apart, and it makes queues and contracts possible. In public life it appears as truthful noting and a speaking order. It also forbids imposing a private creed on a citizen.
Q2 · UPSC Mains 2019 · UPGS4 · 8 marks · Solution
What is the process of strengthening the moral values? Whether strengthening of moral values helps in character-building? Discuss.
Civil Service aptitude and values
Values grow by habituation, trusted models, apology, and institutions that reward fairness. Public reason asks a value to be justified beyond the clan. Character is those values become a stable will when unwatched. Strengthening helps character only when the act meets cost and the office does not punish honesty. A drilled honour that refuses fact is rigidity, not republican character.
Q3 · UPSC Mains 2019 · UPGS4 · 8 marks · Solution
Write short notes on: (A) Ethical responsibilities of public servant. (B) Public interest and the right to information.
Probity in Governance
Ethical responsibility is fidelity to the Constitution, truthful files, neutrality, and citizen-centric delivery. Illegal oral orders are answered on file, not in secret obedience. Public interest is the open community’s welfare, not office comfort. RTI 2005 makes information the rule; Section 4 and speaking orders serve that rule. Exemptions protect privacy and security; vendetta is not public interest.