UPSC Mains 2021 GS Paper 4 Q10: model answer
The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has quickly spread to various countries. As on May 8th, 2020, in India 56342 positive cases of corona had been reported. India with a population of more than 1.35 billion had difficulty in controlling the transmission of coronavirus among its population. Multiple strategies became necessary to handle this outbreak. The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare of India raised awareness about this outbreak and to take all necessary actions to control the spread of COVID-19. Indian Government implemented a 55-day lockdown throughout the country to reduce the transmission of the virus. Schools and colleges had shifted to alternative mode of teaching-learning-evaluation and certification. Online mode became popular during these days. India was not prepared for a sudden onslaught of such a crisis due to limited infrastructure in terms of human resource, money and other facilities needed for taking care of this situation. This disease did not spare anybody irrespective of caste, creed, religion on the one hand and 'have and have not' on the other. Deficiencies in hospital beds, oxygen cylinders, ambulances, hospital staff and crematorium were the most crucial aspects. You are a hospital administrator in a public hospital at the time when coronavirus had attacked large number of people and patients were pouring into hospital day in and day out. (a) What are your criteria and justification for putting your clinical and non-clinical staff to attend to the patients knowing fully well that it is highly infectious disease and resources and infrastructure are limited? (b) If yours is a private hospital, whether your justification and decision would remain same as that of a public hospital?
What the question wants
As administrator of a public hospital in the pandemic, give criteria and justification for deploying clinical and non-clinical staff, and say whether your decision would differ in a private hospital.
How to structure it
Criteria, justification, private hospital.
(a) Criteria and justification
(b) Private hospital comparison
How to think it through
Criteria: skill match, vulnerability of staff (age, comorbidities, pregnancy), rotation to prevent burnout, PPE availability, training, volunteer first, quarantine/rest, insurance (PMGKP insurance ₹50 lakh for health workers 2020), Epidemic Diseases (Amendment) Act 2020 protecting health workers from violence. Justification: duty of care (to patients) and duty to staff; utilitarian (save most lives); professional ethics (Hippocratic oath; NMC regulations); fairness; reciprocity. Private: same core ethics (medical duty), but legal obligations differ (contractual; profit), though Clinical Establishments Act, state directives requisitioned beds; ethical duty identical; price capping; so decision broadly same, plus fair pricing and not turning away.
Model answer
Stakeholders
- Patients; clinical and non-clinical staff and their families; the hospital; the community; the government.
Dilemmas
- Duty to patients vs duty to protect staff; scarcity vs fairness; profit vs care (in private hospitals).
Options
- Deploy everyone equally; deploy only volunteers; deploy by clear criteria with protection and rotation.
In a pandemic, a hospital administrator has two sets of patients: those in the beds and those in the scrubs. Both must be protected.
(a) Criteria for deploying staff
- Skill match: intensivists and trained nurses in ICUs; others in wards, triage and screening after short training.
- Vulnerability: staff who are older, pregnant or have serious illnesses placed in low-exposure roles or tele-consultation.
- Volunteers first, then a fair roster.
- Rotation and rest: fixed shifts, quarantine breaks and mental health support to prevent burnout.
- Protection: no one deployed without PPE and training.
- Support for non-clinical staff: sanitation, ambulance and mortuary workers are equally exposed and equally entitled to protection and respect.
Justification
- Duty of care: health workers' professional oath and medical ethics require treating patients in emergencies.
- Saving the most lives: using skills where they are needed most.
- Reciprocity: those who take risks deserve protection; health workers were covered by a ₹50 lakh insurance scheme in 2020, and the Epidemic Diseases (Amendment) Act, 2020 made violence against them a serious offence.
- Fairness: transparent rosters prevent resentment and favouritism.
(b) In a private hospital
- The core ethics would remain the same: a patient's right to emergency care does not depend on ownership. The Supreme Court has held that no hospital can refuse emergency treatment.
- Differences in practice: contracts and costs matter more. I would add fair pricing within government caps, honest billing, and no turning away of patients unable to pay upfront.
- Partnership with the State: reserve beds as directed and share data on beds and oxygen honestly, so that patients are not sent from gate to gate.
The virus did not check whether a hospital was public or private. Neither should our sense of duty.
Draw: A matrix: staff skill (high/low) against personal risk (high/low), with deployment choices in each cell.
Keywords, cases and data to drop in
duty of care, triage, skill match, vulnerable staff, volunteers, rotation, burnout, PPE, non-clinical staff, PMGKP insurance ₹50 lakh, Epidemic Diseases (Amendment) Act 2020, reciprocity, fairness, emergency treatment, price caps, public-private partnership.
Where most answers lose marks
- Saying a private hospital may turn away patients or staff may refuse duty freely; emergency care is an ethical and legal duty in both.
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.