UPSC Mains 2015 GS Paper 4 Q13: model answer
You are heading a district administration in a particular department. Your senior officer calls you from the State Headquarters and tells you that a plot in Rampur village is to have a building constructed on it for a school. A visit is scheduled during which he will visit the site along with the chief engineer and the senior architect. He wants you to check out all the papers relating to it and to ensure that the visit is properly arranged. You examine the file which relates to the period before you joined the department. The land was acquired from the local Panchayat at a nominal cost and the papers show that clearance certificates are available from the two of the three authorities who have to certify the site's suitability. There is no certification by the architect available on file. You decide to visit Rampur to ensure that all is in order as stated on file. When you visit Rampur, you find that the plot under reference is part of Thakurgarh Fort and that the walls, ramparts, etc., are running across it. The fort is well away from the main village, therefore a school here will be a serious inconvenience for the children. However, the area near the village has potential to expand into a larger residential area. The development charges on the existing plot, at the fort, will be very high and the question of heritage site has not been addressed. Moreover, the Sarpanch, at the time of acquisition of the land, was a relative of your predecessor. The whole transaction appears to have been done with some vested interest. (a) List the likely vested interests of the concerned parties. (b) Some of the options for action available to you are listed below. Discuss the merits and demerits of each of the options: (i) You can await the visit of the superior officer and let him take a decision. (ii) You can seek his advice in writing or on phone. (iii) You can consult your predecessor/colleagues, etc., and then decide what to do. (iv) You can find out if any alternate plot can be got in exchange and then send a comprehensive written report. Can you suggest any other option with proper justification?
What the question wants
List the vested interests in a suspicious school-site acquisition, evaluate four options, and suggest any other option.
How to structure it
Interests, options, my option.
(a) Vested interests
(b) (i)–(iv)
- Other option
How to think it through
Interests: predecessor (relative Sarpanch), Sarpanch (sold panchayat land cheaply? or got deal/ownership of new development near village), contractors (high development charges), possibly real estate (village expansion land kept free for builders), certifying officers who cleared without visit. Heritage: Ancient Monuments Act 1958 (AMASR), state archaeology; architect certificate missing. Options evaluation. Other: inspect thoroughly, factual report before visit, propose alternative site near village, refer heritage aspect to ASI/state archaeology, flag the relationship to vigilance.
Model answer
Stakeholders
- Village children and parents; the panchayat; my predecessor and the former Sarpanch; certifying authorities; the heritage site; my senior officer; me.
Dilemmas
- Following the file vs reporting the field; loyalty to a predecessor vs truth; speed of the project vs suitability and legality.
Options
- Wait for the senior; seek his advice; consult the predecessor; find an alternative and report.
The file said everything was in order. The site said otherwise. A good officer believes the site.
(a) Likely vested interests
- My predecessor: a favour to his relative, the then Sarpanch.
- The former Sarpanch: payment or influence through the deal, and perhaps keeping the land near the village free for private development.
- Contractors: high development charges on a difficult site mean a bigger contract.
- Certifying officials: two clearances given, possibly without a visit.
- Land interests: those who gain if the land near the village is later sold for housing.
(b) Evaluating the options
- (i) Await the senior's visit: easy, but I would be hiding what I know and letting him walk into an embarrassing site.
- (ii) Seek advice on phone or in writing: better, but asking without a full picture shifts my job upward.
- (iii) Consult predecessor and colleagues: the predecessor is himself an interested party; this could tip him off.
- (iv) Find an alternative plot and send a comprehensive report: the most responsible option; it presents the problem with a solution.
My option
- Combine (iv) with immediate written reporting: before the visit, send my senior a factual report with photographs covering the fort walls, the distance from the village, development costs and the missing architect's certificate.
- Refer the heritage question to the State Archaeology Department or the ASI, since construction near a protected monument is regulated under the AMASR Act, 1958.
- Identify an alternative plot near the village with the present panchayat.
- Flag the relationship between the predecessor and the Sarpanch to the vigilance wing, without accusing anyone.
- Use the scheduled visit to show both sites. A school must be built where children can
walk to it, not where someone's interests are served.
Draw: Two maps side by side: the fort plot far from the village and the alternative plot near the growing settlement.
Keywords, cases and data to drop in
vested interests, file vs field, conflict of interest, predecessor, heritage site, AMASR Act 1958, ASI, architect certificate, alternative plot, comprehensive report, vigilance, due diligence.
Where most answers lose marks
- Consulting the predecessor first, or accusing him publicly without evidence.
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.