Revision summary
The clash is a scheduled UPSC interview versus two badly injured relatives who need help now. Life and rescue come first; the interview is a real but lesser good. Action is scene safety, emergency call, hospital handover, police information, then a truthful request to UPSC. Do not impersonate, bribe, or invent. Do not stay only to argue while they bleed. The same duty holds for a stranger; kinship removes the excuse of walking on.
Model answer
Introduction
The stem puts a life's work and two bleeding relatives on the same road. The ethical centre is the duty to rescue a life in front of you, not the duty to protect a timetable.
Body
Stakeholders
- The injured mother and child, who need first aid, transport and a hospital now.
- Other road users, if the scene is still dangerous.
- You as an aspirant, with an interview letter that will not easily be reissued as a right.
- Family members waiting at the UPSC venue and at home.
- The Union Public Service Commission, which can be told the truth later; it cannot un-kill a child.
- Bystanders who may help or may only film.
Ethical issues and values
- Sanctity of life and the duty of rescue: a person who can help and walks away treats kin as less than a career file.
- Justice and non-partiality: they are relatives, but the same duty would hold for a stranger; kinship only removes the last excuse of "someone else will stop".
- Integrity: do not invent a story later. Do not, equally, use the accident as a casual lie if it did not happen.
- Emotional intelligence: panic will waste minutes; a sequence will save them.
- The interview is a legitimate personal good. It is not a higher good than two preventable deaths.
Options
- Option 1: Drive on to the interview and telephone someone else to help.
- Merit: you may reach the board on time.
- Demerit: if they need you now — bleeding, blocked airway, no other competent adult — the call is not help. A career built on that choice is already a comment on public service.
- Option 2: Stay for hours in a crowd argument with police, missing both hospital and any chance to inform UPSC.
- Merit: looks loyal.
- Demerit: you may not be the best person to file the FIR; the hospital is the first institution that matters.
- Option 3: Immediate rescue: make the scene safe, first aid, ambulance or your vehicle to the nearest hospital, hand over to doctors, inform family and police, then inform UPSC with facts and seek a later board if the rules allow.
- Merit: life first, then the career through a truthful channel.
- Demerit: you may still miss this day's interview; that is a real loss, not a moral error.
Action I would take
- Stop. Park without causing a second crash. Switch on hazards. Keep the child and mother from further traffic.
- Call emergency services at once (108 / 112) while checking breathing and bleeding. Use any first-aid you truly know; do not play surgeon.
- Use bystanders for specific jobs: one to wave traffic, one to fetch a doctor if a clinic is in sight, one to call the other parent.
- If the ambulance is late and the injuries are clearly time-critical, take them to the nearest hospital yourself, with someone in the back if possible.
- Do not abandon them in a corridor. Hand over to medical staff, give names, and leave a reachable number.
- Inform the police with a true account. You are a relative and a witness; do not manage the scene as if you owned it.
- Then contact UPSC / the designated help number / a mentor with the hospital record and time stamps, request postponement or a fresh interview slot as the Commission's process allows, and accept a no if the rules give no discretion.
- Do not ask a friend to impersonate you at the gate. Do not bribe a clerk for a false attendance.
- If a stranger had been on the road, the sequence would be the same. Relatives only make delay more shameful, not more optional.
Justification
- Article 21 is not only for the State. A future civil servant who cannot stop for blood will not stop for a file that has no camera.
- Professional codes and the Good Samaritan principle, recognised in Indian policy after the Supreme Court's directions on road-accident helpers, protect a rescuer who acts in good faith.
- The personality test itself looks for integrity and compassion. Saving two lives is the test that arrived early.
- Career harm is a cost I should try to reduce through honest communication, not through neglect of the injured.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD SCENE[Accident on the way] --> STOP[Stop and make safe] STOP --> AID[First aid and 108] AID --> HOSP[Hospital handover] HOSP --> UPSC[Inform UPSC with proof] DRIVE[Drive past] --> CAREER[Maybe on time] DRIVE --> DEATH[Preventable death]
Conclusion
I would stop, stabilise, move them to a hospital, inform police and family, then tell UPSC the truth and ask for whatever lawful second chance exists. An interview can be petitioned. A death on the kerb cannot.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Case study. You are a Public Information Officer (PIO) in a government department. You are aware that the RTI Act 2005 envisages transparency and accountability in administration. The act has functioned as a check on the supposedly arbitrarily administrative behaviour and actions. However, as a PIO you have observed that there are citizens who filed RTI applications not for themselves but on behalf of such stakeholders who purportedly want to have access to information to further their own interests. At the same time there are these RTI activists who routinely file RTI applications and attempt to extort money from the decision makers. This type of RTI activism has affected the functioning of the administration adversely and also possibly jeopardises the genuineness of the applications which are essentially aimed at getting justice. What measures would you suggest to separate genuine and non-genuine applications? Give merits and demerits of your suggestions.
Next question on this syllabus topic (2017 · Q12). View answer →
-
If many people have already stopped, must I still miss the interview?
If competent help is truly in charge and you add nothing, you may give your number and go. If they are still unattended or you are the only relative who can consent and carry, you stay.
-
Will UPSC always give a new date?
There is no right to a new date. You still do not buy a board seat with two deaths. You tell the truth and take the Commission's decision.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2017 · Q9 · GS IV · 20 marks
Case study. A building permitted for three floors, while being extended illegally to 6 floors by a builder, collapses. As a consequence, a number of innocent labourers including women and children died. These labourers are migrants of different places. The government immediately announced cash relief to the aggrieved families and arrested the builder. Give reasons for such incidents taking place across the country. Suggest measures to prevent their occurrence. -
2017 · Q10 · GS IV · 20 marks
Case study. You are an honest and responsible civil servant. You often observe the following: (a) There is a general perception that adhering to ethical conduct one may face difficulties to oneself and cause problems for the family, whereas unfair practices may help to reach the career goals. (b) When the number of people adopting unfair means is large, a small minority having a penchant towards ethical means makes no difference. (c) Sticking to ethical means is detrimental to the larger developmental goals (d) While one may not involve oneself in large unethical practices, but giving and accepting small gifts makes the system more efficient. Examine the above statements with their merits and demerits. -
2017 · Q12 · GS IV · 20 marks
Case study. You are a Public Information Officer (PIO) in a government department. You are aware that the RTI Act 2005 envisages transparency and accountability in administration. The act has functioned as a check on the supposedly arbitrarily administrative behaviour and actions. However, as a PIO you have observed that there are citizens who filed RTI applications not for themselves but on behalf of such stakeholders who purportedly want to have access to information to further their own interests. At the same time there are these RTI activists who routinely file RTI applications and attempt to extort money from the decision makers. This type of RTI activism has affected the functioning of the administration adversely and also possibly jeopardises the genuineness of the applications which are essentially aimed at getting justice. What measures would you suggest to separate genuine and non-genuine applications? Give merits and demerits of your suggestions. -
2017 · Q13 · GS IV · 20 marks
Case study. You are the head of the Human Resources department of an organization. One day one of the workers died on duty. His family was demanding compensation. However, the company denied compensation because it was revealed in investigation that he was drunk at the time of the accident. The workers of the company went on to strike demanding compensation for the family of the deceased. The Chairman of the management board has asked for your recommendation. What recommendation would you provide to the management? Discuss the merits and demerits of each of the recommendation. -
2017 · Q14 · GS IV · 20 marks
Case study. You are the manager of a spare parts company A and you have to negotiate a deal with the manager of a large manufacturing company B. The deal is highly competitive and sealing the deal is critical for your company. The deal is being worked out over a dinner. After dinner the manager of manufacturing company B offered to drop you to the hotel in his car. On the way to hotel he happens to hit motorcycle injuring the motorcyclist badly. You know the manager was driving fast and thus lost control. The law enforcement officer comes to investigate the issue and you are the sole eyewitness to it. Knowing the strict laws pertaining to road accidents you are aware that your honest account of the incident would lead to the prosecution of the manager and as a consequence the deal is likely to bejeopardised, which is of immense importance to your company. What are the dilemmas you face? What will be your response to the situation? -
2016 · Q9 · GS IV · 20 marks
Case study. ABC Ltd. is a large transnational company having diversified business activities with a huge shareholder base. The company is continuously expanding the generating employment. The company, in its expansion and diversification programme, decides to establish a new plant at Vikaspuri, an area which is underdeveloped. The new plant is designed to use energy efficient technology that will help the company to save production cost by 20%. The company's decision goes well with the Government policy of attracting investment to develop such underdeveloped regions. The government has also announced tax holiday for five years for the companies that invest in underdeveloped areas. However, the new plant may bring chaos for the inhabitants of Vikaspuri region, which is otherwise tranquil. The new plant may result in increased cost of living, aliens migrating to the region, disturbing the social and economic order. The company sensing the possible protest tried to educate the people of Vikaspuri region and public in general that how its Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) policy would help overcome the likely difficulties of the residents of Vikaspuri region. In spite of this the protests begin and some of the residents decided to approach the judiciary as their plea before the Government did not yield any result. (a) Identify the issues involved in the case. (b) What can be suggested to satisfy the company's goal and to address the residents' concern? -
2016 · Q10 · GS IV · 20 marks
Case study. Saraswati was a successful IT professional in USA. Moved by patriotic sense of doing something for the country she returned to India. Together with some other like-minded friends, she formed an NGO to build a school for a poor rural community. The objective of the school was to provide the best quality modern education at a nominal cost. She soon discovered that she has to seek permission from a number of Government agencies. The rules and procedures were quite confusing and cumbersome. What frustrated her most were delays, callous attitude of officials and constant demand for bribes. Her experience and the experience of many others like her have deterred people from taking up social service projects. A measure of Government control over voluntary social work is necessary. But it should not be exercised in a coercive a corrupt manner. What measures can you suggest to ensure that due control is exercised but well meaning, honest NGO efforts are not thwarted? -
2016 · Q11 · GS IV · 20 marks
Case study. A fresh engineering graduate gets a job in a prestigious chemical industry. She likes the work. The salary is also good. However, after a few months she accidentally discovers that a highly toxic waste is being secretly discharged into a river nearby. This is causing health problems to the villagers downstream who depend on the river for their water needs. She is perturbed and mentions her concern to her colleagues who have been with the company for longer periods. They advise her to keep quite as anyone who mentions the topic is summarily dismissed. She cannot risk losing her job as she is the sole beard-winner for her family and has to support her ailing parents and siblings. At first, she thinks that if her seniors are keeping quiet, why should she stick out her neck. But her conscience pricks her to do something to save the river and the people who depend upon it. At heart she feels that the advice of silence given by her friends is not correct though she cannot give reasons for it. She thinks you are a wise person and seeks your advice. (a) What arguments can you advance to show her that keeping quiet is not morally right? (b) What course of action would you advice her to adopt and why?
More from this topic
Q12 · UPSC Mains 2025 · GS IV · 20 marks
Case study. Ashok is Divisional Commissioner of one of the border districts of the North East State. A few years back, Military has taken over the neighbouring country after overthrowing the elected civil government. Civil war situation is prevailing in the country especially in last two years. However, internal situation further deteriorated due to rebel groups taking over control of certain populated areas near own border. Due to intense fight between military and rebel groups, civilian casualties has increased manifold in recent past. In the meantime, in one night Ashok got information from the local police guarding the border check post that there are about 200-250 people mainly women and children trying to cross over to our side of the border. There are also about 10 soldiers with their weapons in military uniform part of this group who wants to cross over. Women and Children are also crying and begging for help. A few of them are injured and bleeding profusely need immediate medical care. Ashok tried to contact Home Secretary of the State but failed to do so due to poor connectivity mainly due to inclement weather. (a) What are the options available with Ashok to cope with the situation?(b) What are the ethical and legal dilemmas being faced by Ashok?(c) Which of the options, do you think would be more appropriate for Ashok to adopt and why?(d) In the present situation, what are the extra precautionary measures to be taken by the Border Guarding Police in dealing with soldiers in uniform?
Ethics Case Studies
Options range from pushing everyone back to opening the gate to armed men; both extremes fail. The dilemma is non-refoulement and medical duty versus sovereignty and the risk of a ruse. The better path is triage and shelter for civilians, especially women and children, and separate internment of disarmed soldiers pending the Centre. Border police should keep distance, seal weapons, separate camps, and avoid humiliation or leaks. Waiting for a dead phone while a child bleeds is not caution; it is omission.
Q11 · UPSC Mains 2025 · GS IV · 20 marks
Case study. Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Program, MGNREGA was earlier known as National Rural Employment Scheme, NREGA. It is an Indian Social Welfare Program that aimed at fulfilling the 'Right to Work' provisions made in the Constitution. MGNREGA was launched in 2006 under Rural Employment Sector by the Ministry of Rural Development. Main objective of the program is to give legal guarantee of wage employment to the adult members of rural households who are willing to do unskilled manual labour work subject to a maximum of 100 days per year for every household. Every rural household has the right to register under the scheme, job card is issued to the registered, Job Card holder can seek employment; State Government shall pay 25% of minimum wage for the first 30 days as compensatory daily unemployment allowance to the families and of wage for remaining period of the year. MGNREGA work was undertaken by various Gram Panchayats. You have been appointed as an Administrator Incharge of the District. You have been given the responsibility of monitoring MGNREGA work undertaken by various Gram Panchayats. You are also given the authority to give technical sanctions to all MGNREGA works. In one of the Panchayats in your jurisdiction, you notice that your predecessor has mismanaged the Program in terms of: (i) Money not disbursed to actual job-seekers.(ii) Muster Rolls of the Labourers not properly maintained.(iii) Mismatch between the work done and payments made.(iv) Payments made to fictitious persons.(v) Job Cards were given without looking into the need of person.(vi) Mismanagement of funds and to the extent of siphoning of funds.(vii) Approved works that never existed. (a) What is your reaction to the above situation and how do you restore the proper functioning of MGNREGA Program in this regard?(b) What actions would you initiate, to solve the various issues listed above?(c) How would you deal with the above situation?
Ethics Case Studies
The first duty is to protect records, tell workers the truth, and stop further theft. Arrears must reach real job-seekers while ghosts, fake works and siphoned funds go to vigilance and the police. Job cards should be re-verified without stripping genuine households. The predecessor deserves due process, not a media hanging or a cover-up. Social audit, geotagging and a public dashboard keep the repair from rotting again.
Q10 · UPSC Mains 2025 · GS IV · 20 marks
Case study. Rajesh is a Group A officer with nine years of service. He is posted as Administrative Officer in an Oil Public Sector undertaking. As an Administrative Officer he is responsible for managing and coordinating various administrative tasks to ensure smooth functioning of office. He also manages office supplies, equipment etc. Rajesh is now sufficient senior and is expecting his next promotion in JAG (Junior Administrative Grade) in the next one or two years. He knows that promotion is based on examination of ACRs/Performance Appraisal of last few years (5 years or so) of an officer by a DPC (Departmental Promotion Committee) and an officer lacking requisite grading of ACRs may not be found fit for promotion. Consequences of losing promotion may entail financial and reputational loss and set-back for career progression. Though he also puts his best efforts in official discharge of his duties, yet he is unsure of assessment by his superior officer. He is now putting extra efforts so that he gets thumping report at the end of financial year. As Administrative Officer, Rajesh is regularly interacting with his immediate boss, who is his reporting officer for writing his ACR. One day he calls Rajesh and wants him to buy computer-related stationery on priority from a particular vendor. Rajesh instructs his office to initiate action for procuring these items. During the day, the dealing Assistant brings an estimate of Rupees Thirty Five Lakhs covering all stationery items from the same vendor. It is noticed that as per delegated financial powers, as provided in the GFR (General Financial Rules) as applicable in that Organisation, expenditure for office items exceeding Rupees Thirty Lakhs requires sanction of the next higher authority (boss in the present case). Rajesh knows that immediate superior would expect all these purchases should be done at his level and may not appreciate such lack of initiative on his part. During discussions with office, he learns that common practice of splitting of expenditure (where large order is divided into a series of smaller ones) is followed to avoid obtaining sanction from higher authority. This practice is against the rules and may come to the adverse notice of Audit. Rajesh is perturbed. He is unsure of taking decision in the matter. (a) What are the options available with Rajesh in the above situation?(b) What are the ethical issues involved in this case?(c) Which would be the most appropriate option for Rajesh and why?
Ethics Case Studies
Splitting ₹35 lakh into smaller bills to avoid the boss’s sanction is a GFR violation, even if it is a common trick. The ethical issues are career fear, a named vendor, and the habit of collective cheating. Rajesh’s options include splitting, lawful phasing, written illegal orders, or a proper sanction. The right choice is a single proposal to the competent authority and a competitive purchase. A promotion that needs a false indent is not worth the integrity it costs.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.