- Filter By :
- Theoretical Questions
- Case Studies
-
Rohit Kumar, an IPS officer serving as Deputy Inspector General (DIG) in a northern state, has observed growing discontent among police personnel over recent promotion and posting decisions. Several officers belonging to the Scheduled Castes (SCs) and the Scheduled Tribes (STs) allege that they are routinely sidelined for key operational posts and denied timely promotions, despite meritorious service records. Officers from certain social backgrounds are often given preference for influential postings in urban and sensitive districts, even when more qualified officers are available.
An internal complaint by the SC/ST Officers’ Association highlights patterns of bias in performance evaluation reports (APARs), where subtle prejudice is reflected in lower gradings. The association petitions Rohit to take action and ensure fair representation. However, when Rohit raises the issue in departmental meetings, senior officers advise him to “avoid stirring caste matters” and maintain institutional unity. Some even warn that pursuing the issue could affect his career progression and invite political backlash.
The state government, facing public scrutiny after recent media reports on caste-based bias in police postings, issues a statement promising an internal inquiry. However, there are attempts to downplay the issue as “misunderstandings” rather than systemic discrimination. Meanwhile, affected officers feel demoralised and consider approaching the National Commission for Scheduled Castes.
As a senior officer, Rohit is expected to uphold constitutional values of equality and justice while maintaining institutional discipline and administrative efficiency. The situation demands a careful balance between ensuring fairness in personnel management and preserving organizational stability.
Questions :
A. What are the key ethical dilemmas faced by Rohit Kumar in this situation?
B. Identify and analyse the conflicting values and principles involved in this case.
C. Evaluate the possible courses of action available to Rohit and their likely consequences.
D. Suggest the most ethical and administratively sound course of action Rohit should take to ensure fairness and institutional integrity.
31 Oct, 2025 GS Paper 4 Case StudiesIntroduction:
Rohit Kumar, as a senior IPS officer, is confronted with an ethical conflict between upholding constitutional principles of equality and justice on one hand, and maintaining institutional harmony and his own career security on the other. This case presents a classic dilemma of “conscience versus conformity.”
A. What are the key ethical dilemmas faced by Rohit Kumar in this situation?
- Equality vs Organizational Conformity:
- Upholding constitutional values (Article 14, 16) and ensuring fair treatment for SC/ST officers may disrupt existing informal power structures.
- Choosing between moral courage to act against bias and maintaining departmental unity.
- Integrity vs Career Security:
- Acting on the discrimination issue may invite political or bureaucratic backlash, affecting his career progression.
- Ethical integrity demands speaking truth to power, but personal consequences create inner conflict.
- Justice vs Institutional Loyalty:
- Loyalty to the police organization urges him to preserve its public image and internal cohesion.
- However, justice and fairness require exposing and addressing systemic discrimination.
- Transparency vs Pressure to Conceal:
- Pressure from seniors to “avoid caste matters” encourages concealment of truth.
- Ethical transparency demands he supports a fair and open inquiry.
- Empathy for Subordinates vs Obedience to Superiors:
- Empathizing with marginalized officers and ensuring morale and motivation.
- At the same time, respecting hierarchical discipline and authority.
- Short-term Stability vs Long-term Ethical Reform:
- Ignoring the issue may offer short-term peace.
- Addressing it ethically ensures long-term institutional credibility and morale.
B. Identify and analyse the conflicting values and principles involved in this case.
Value / Principle Explanation of Conflict Constitutional Morality vs Administrative Conformity The Constitution enshrines equality and social justice, but bureaucratic norms often prioritize obedience and maintaining the “chain of command.” Rule of Law vs Discretionary Authority Rohit must ensure promotions and postings follow objective, rule-based criteria, yet senior officers exercise significant discretion that can enable bias. Justice (Substantive) vs Procedural Compliance Ensuring substantive justice for marginalized officers may require questioning existing evaluation systems, even if they are procedurally “correct.” Impartiality vs Social Sensitivity A police leader must remain neutral in personnel matters, but neutrality should not become indifference to systemic discrimination. Objectivity vs Empathy Administrative objectivity requires decisions based on facts and data, while empathy demands understanding the lived experiences of discrimination faced by colleagues. C. Evaluate the possible courses of action available to Rohit and their likely consequences.
Option Description Likely Consequences (a) Ignore the issue as advised by seniors Maintain silence and focus on routine duties. - Short-term peace and career safety.
- Loss of moral credibility and erosion of trust among subordinates.
- Perpetuation of discrimination and injustice.
(b) Raise the issue internally through formal departmental channels Document evidence and propose an impartial internal review mechanism. - Demonstrates procedural integrity.
- May invite resistance from superiors but strengthens institutional fairness.
- Builds long-term morale and trust among personnel.
(c) Support the state government’s inquiry with facts and data Provide objective inputs to ensure inquiry transparency. - Enhances accountability and constitutional adherence.
- May face political backlash but reinforces ethical governance.
(d) Directly approach statutory bodies (e.g., NCSC) Escalate the issue externally if no internal redress occurs. - Strong ethical stand but may be viewed as breach of discipline.
- Could politicize the issue, affecting institutional cohesion.
(e) Sensitize senior officers and initiate diversity awareness measures Promote internal workshops and reforms on fairness and bias. - Improves organizational ethics and inclusivity.
- Gradual change but sustainable and non-confrontational.
D. Suggest the most ethical and administratively sound course of action Rohit should take to ensure fairness and institutional integrity.
- Internal Due Process:
- Initiate a fair and data-driven review of APAR gradings, postings, and promotions.
- Suggest formation of an impartial committee including SC/ST representatives.
- Evidence-Based Reporting:
- Prepare a confidential report highlighting systemic patterns, backed by data—not allegations.
- Present findings to higher authorities with recommendations for corrective policy measures.
- Engage and Sensitize Seniors:
- Advocate that promoting fairness strengthens institutional legitimacy and public trust.
- Conduct sensitization programs on unconscious bias and diversity management.
- Cooperate with Government Inquiry:
- Provide factual, transparent inputs to ensure credibility of the inquiry.
- Empathetic Leadership:
- Personally reassure affected officers of fair consideration within procedural limits.
Ethical Justification:
- Upholds Constitutional Values – equality, justice, dignity (Articles 14, 16, 46).
- Demonstrates Integrity, Courage of Conviction, and Accountability.
- Balances Ethical Idealism with Administrative Prudence – ensuring fairness without destabilizing the organization.
Conclusion:
Rohit’s most ethical path lies in institutional reform through integrity and transparency rather than confrontation. By promoting procedural fairness, evidence-based decision-making, and inclusive leadership, he can uphold constitutional morality while preserving the organization’s stability and morale, a model of ethical public administration.
To get PDF version, Please click on "Print PDF" button.
Print PDF - Equality vs Organizational Conformity:
