Case studies: welfare, empathy and public pressure

1 · VidBodh original20 marks250 words

Meera Joshi took charge as District Collector of Bharatpur in March 2025. Her district was chosen as one of four pilots for an automated beneficiary verification system that cross-checks ration, pension and housing records against identity and banking databases, and flags suspected duplicates for deletion. The system was procured from a private vendor at a cost of Rs 9 crore, and the state has budgeted for statewide rollout in the coming financial year. In the first six months, 11,400 cards were deleted in the district. Reported savings were Rs 31 crore. Meera's district was ranked first in the state dashboard, and she was commended in writing by the Chief Secretary. In October, during a night halt in Kherli block, an elderly woman named Phoolwati tells her she has received no ration since June. Her card was flagged as a duplicate because her name appears as Phulwati in one record and her husband's name is spelt differently in another. She was never informed. She walked to the block office twice and was told the computer had removed her. Meera orders a sample check of 500 deletions. Of these, 217 appear to be genuine beneficiaries wrongly excluded, overwhelmingly from migrant, tribal and single-woman households. When she asks the vendor for the deletion logic, she is told the model is proprietary. The department's own officers cannot explain any individual deletion. Her proposal to suspend deletions is declined. The Principal Secretary notes that the savings figure has already been placed before the state cabinet, that no other district has reported such errors, and that a pause would delay the rollout. He adds, not unkindly, that she is the only Collector raising this. (a) What is your immediate response to the situation? (b) Discuss the ethical issues involved. (c) What arguments, logical and ethical, would you place before the state government to convince it of the need to act? (d) What safeguards should govern automated decisions that extinguish an entitlement?

The model answer is published the following morning.

2 · VidBodh original20 marks250 words

Farhan Ali is District Magistrate of a border district. An enquiry into a school admission irregularity uncovers a family of six living in a village in the district. The parents entered the country without documents in 2007 and have worked as agricultural labour since. Their four children were born here, studied in local schools, speak only the local language, and have no connection with the country of origin. The eldest, Salma, aged eighteen, has cleared a state examination and been offered a nursing seat. Investigation establishes that the family's identity documents were obtained through a corrupt process involving a former village-level functionary, now deceased. The documents are therefore void. The law provides for deportation. But the neighbouring country's authorities do not acknowledge the family and are unlikely to issue travel documents. Detention pending deportation could therefore continue indefinitely, and would separate four children from school. The village panchayat has passed a resolution in the family's support; the parents have worked in the same three households for over a decade. A political organisation has publicised the case and demanded strict action, and has announced a demonstration outside the collectorate. Farhan's report will determine what happens. He can recommend prosecution and deportation proceedings, recommend regularisation of the children's position while proceeding against the parents, refer the matter for a policy decision, or record the facts without recommendation. (a) Identify the ethical issues involved. (b) How should the requirements of law be weighed against the position of children born in the country? (c) Evaluate each option available to Farhan. (d) Which would you adopt and why?

The model answer is published the following morning.

3 · VidBodh original20 marks250 words

Arjun Bhattacharya is District Magistrate of a communally sensitive district. A large religious procession is scheduled for 18 September. On the evening of 16 September, a video begins circulating showing a man desecrating a place of worship. Within four hours the cyber cell establishes that the video is from another state and is three years old. By then it has been forwarded an estimated 80,000 times within the district. Two versions carry a voice-over naming a local locality. By 9 pm, crowds have gathered at two points. Shops in the main market have closed. Religious leaders of both communities have offered to issue a joint appeal but tell Arjun privately that people have already believed it, and that an appeal from them may now be read as taking sides. The Superintendent of Police recommends an immediate suspension of mobile internet across the district. Arjun knows what this will do. Payment systems in the district are almost entirely digital. The ambulance dispatch system for the district hospital runs on the same network. Class 12 supplementary results are due for release the next morning. And it will prevent his own administration from circulating the fact-check, which has already been prepared with the original video's provenance. The last shutdown in the state, ordered for two days, ran for nineteen. The Home Department has asked to be kept informed but has given no direction. (a) Identify the ethical issues involved. (b) What options are available to Arjun? Evaluate each critically. (c) Which would you adopt and why? (d) What principles should govern the use of communication shutdowns as an instrument of public order?

The model answer is published the following morning.