UPSC Mains 2013 GS Paper 4 Q13: model answer
As a senior officer in the Finance Ministry, you have access to some confidential and crucial information about policy decisions that the Government is about to announce. These decisions are likely to have far-reaching impact on the housing and construction industry. If the builders have access to this information beforehand, they can make huge profits. One of the builders has done a lot of quality work for the Government and is known to be close to your immediate superior, who asks you to disclose this information to the said builder. (a) What are the options available to you? (b) Evaluate each of these options and choose the option which you would adopt, giving reasons.
What the question wants
List options for a Finance Ministry officer asked by his superior to leak confidential policy information to a builder, evaluate them and choose one.
How to structure it
Options, evaluation, choice.
- Options
- Merits and demerits
- My choice
How to think it through
Leak = breach of oath of secrecy, Official Secrets Act 1923 Section 5, AIS/CCS conduct rule on unauthorised communication of information (CCS Rule 11), insider trading-like unfair advantage, PC Act. Builder's good work irrelevant. Options: comply; refuse orally; refuse and record; report to higher authority/vigilance. Choose: polite refusal, put in writing, inform Secretary/CVO if pressed; continue to treat builder fairly.
Model answer
Stakeholders
- The public and honest builders; home buyers; the builder; my superior; the Ministry; me.
Dilemmas
- Obedience to superior vs oath of secrecy; a 'good' builder's reward vs a level playing field.
Options
- Leak as asked; refuse orally; refuse in writing; report to the Secretary or the CVO.
Information about a coming policy is public property held in trust. Handing it to one builder is like letting one runner start the race before the whistle.
Options and evaluation
- Disclose as asked: keeps my superior happy and rewards a builder who has done good work. But it breaks the oath of secrecy, the Official Secrets Act, 1923, and the rule in the CCS (Conduct) Rules against unauthorised communication of official information. It also gives the builder unfair profits at the expense of competitors and buyers.
- Refuse orally and leave it there: I stay clean, but the pressure remains, there is no record, and someone else may leak it.
- Refuse in writing, citing the rules: protects me, deters the superior and creates a record. It may sour my relationship with him.
- Report to the Secretary or the Chief Vigilance Officer: protects the policy, but if done as the first step, before giving the superior a chance to step back, it may look like an attack.
My choice
- Refuse firmly but respectfully, reminding my superior that disclosure is an offence under the law and the conduct rules, and could expose both of us.
- Put the refusal on file in a short note so that the record is clear.
- If he insists or the information seems to be leaking, inform the Secretary and the CVO in writing.
- Keep the builder's past work separate: he can be fairly considered in future contracts; good work earns a fair chance, not secret advantages.
- Suggest that the Ministry restrict access to sensitive files and log who views them.
A civil servant's loyalty runs to the Constitution and the public, not to a superior's friendships. Integrity here costs a little goodwill; a leak would cost the government's credibility in the market.
Draw: A race track with one runner starting early, labelled 'leaked information'.
Keywords, cases and data to drop in
confidential policy, oath of secrecy, Official Secrets Act 1923, CCS (Conduct) Rules unauthorised communication, level playing field, insider advantage, written refusal, CVO, access logs, integrity, loyalty to Constitution.
Where most answers lose marks
- Going to the media or police first; the internal route (written refusal, then Secretary/CVO) comes first.
Related Mains PYQs
- A business house is working on a project that could displace a forest community from their habitat. As the administrative officer of… UPSC 2026 · GS-IV
- Owing to paucity of time, a university professor generates a Ph.D. evaluation report using Artificial Intelligence and submits it with some modifications.… UPSC 2026 · GS-IV
- An endangered tribe has developed a severe skeletal deformity. A university research has identified a mineral supplement as a possible remedy, though… UPSC 2026 · GS-IV
- Discuss how national security can be balanced with concerns of human rights. UPSC 2026 · GS-IV
Fresh examples from current affairs
Supreme Court: no prior approval under Section 17A needed to probe a bribe demand
In a judgment of 16 October 2026, a Supreme Court Bench of Justices S.V.N. Bhatti and N.V. Anjaria held that investigating a bribe demand by a public servant does not need prior approval under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Asking for a bribe, the court said, is not part of discharging official duties.
UPSC angle: Prelims: Sections 7, 7A, 17A and 19 of the PC Act. · Mains GS-II/GS-IV: honest officers versus accountability.
19 Oct 2026Learn the concept
Question text as printed in the official UPSC Civil Services (Main) question paper. The model answer is original Battle IAS work; use it to learn structure, not to memorise.
Want every PYQ in one place? See the Battle IAS PYQ Book.