Mains Marathon

Approach :

• Briefly introduce the situation to establish context.
• Identify the ethical dilemmas faced by Priya in the current situation.
• Discuss the available options and possible consequences.
• Recommend the suitable course of action.
• Justify it with ethical reasoning.
• Conclude with a suitable way forward.

Answer:

As Priya, District Supply Officer, I oversee the Public Distribution System (PDS) crucial for BPL families. Complaints and whistleblower reports reveal that Fair Price Shop (FPS) dealers divert subsidized grains to the black market using fake ration cards and forged records. My verification confirms massive leakage and official complicity. Senior officers urge me to go slow due to political sensitivities, as a local minister’s relative is involved. Meanwhile, genuine beneficiaries suffer, and civil society demands urgent action.

Body :

Ethical Dilemmas

• Duty vs. Political Pressure: She must choose between upholding her duty to serve the poor and the pressure to protect political interests.
• Integrity vs. Career Risk: Taking firm action risks harassment, adverse postings, and career setbacks.
• Justice vs. Corruption: She must protect the rights of vulnerable beneficiaries against systemic corruption involving colleagues and politicians.
• Transparency vs. Concealment: Deciding whether to expose leakages openly or conceal them to maintain administrative harmony.
• Accountability vs. Loyalty: Balancing responsibility to the public with loyalty to the administration.

B.Options and Consequences

• Option A: Follow Orders and Go Slow
  Pros: Political safety and administrative peace.
  Cons: Perpetuates corruption, victimizes the poor, erodes public trust, and violates ethical duty.
• Option B: Take Immediate, Strict Action
  Pros: Upholds integrity and justice, strengthens PDS, helps beneficiaries.
  Cons: Risks political backlash, harassment, and personal safety concerns.
• Option C: Conduct Confidential Inquiry Before Action
  Pros: Builds strong evidence and legal case.
  Cons: Delays justice, prolongs beneficiaries’ suffering, and allows corruption to continue.
• Option D: Collaborate with Civil Society and Media
  Pros: Raises public awareness and pressure for reform.
  Cons: Risks politicisation and administrative backlash.

C.Recommended Course of Action

I recommend a balanced approach (Option C with elements of B and D):

• Launch a thorough, evidence-based investigation documenting leakages and complicity.
• Report findings formally to higher authorities and vigilance bodies to ensure impartial oversight.
• Implement technological safeguards like biometric authentication and digitised record-keeping to curb leakages.
• Collaborate with civil society organisations to build public awareness and monitoring mechanisms.
• Initiate immediate relief measures to provide food security for genuine beneficiaries.
• Keep detailed records of any political or bureaucratic pressure for legal protection.
• Escalate the issue to legal or anti-corruption agencies if obstruction continues.

D.Ethical Justification

• This approach aligns with duty ethics, emphasizing moral obligation to serve vulnerable populations and uphold integrity despite risks.
• It incorporates utilitarianism, aiming to maximize welfare by protecting the greatest number of beneficiaries.
• It also embodies principles of good governance—transparency, accountability, responsiveness, and equity.

Conclusion:

As John Rawls’ theory of justice posits, social and political institutions must be arranged to benefit the least advantaged members of society. Priya’s responsibility is to ensure that the distribution system is just and fair, providing food security to the poorest without discrimination. By acting ethically and courageously, she should uphold the veil of ignorance principle, treating all beneficiaries with impartiality and safeguarding their fundamental rights.