UPSC Mains 2022 GS Paper 4 Q8: model answer
Ramesh is State Civil Services Officer who got the opportunity of getting posted to the capital of a border State after rendering 20 years of service. Ramesh's mother has recently been detected cancer and has been admitted in the leading cancer hospital of the city. His two adolescent children have also got admission in one of the best public schools of the town. After settling down in his appointment as Director in the Home Department of the State, Ramesh got confidential report through intelligence sources that illegal migrants are infiltrating in the State from the neighbouring country. He decided to personally carry out surprise check of the border posts along with his Home Department team. To his surprise, he caught red-handed two families of 12 members infiltrated with the connivance of the security personnel at the border posts. On further inquiry and investigation, it was found that after the migrants from neighbouring country infiltrate, their documentation like Aadhaar Card, Ration Card and Voter Card are also forged and they are made to settle down in a particular area of the State. Ramesh prepared the detailed and comprehensive report and submitted to the Additional Secretary of the State. However, he has summoned by the Additional Home Secretary after a week and was instructed to withdraw the report. The Additional Home Secretary informed Ramesh that the report submitted by him has not been appreciated by the higher authorities. He further cautioned him that if he fails to withdraw the confidential report, he will not only be posted out from the prestigious appointment from the State capital but his further promotion which is due in near future will also get in jeopardy. (a) What are the options available to Ramesh as the Director of the Home Department of the bordering State? (b) What option should Ramesh adopt and why? (c) Critically evaluate each of the options. (d) What are the ethical dilemmas being faced by Ramesh? (e) What policy measures would you suggest to combat the menace of infiltration of illegal migrants from the neighbouring country?
What the question wants
State Ramesh's options when told to withdraw a report on infiltration through border connivance, evaluate them, choose one, name the dilemmas, and suggest policy measures against infiltration.
How to structure it
Five sub-parts.
(a) Options
(c) Evaluation
(b) Choice
(d) Dilemmas
(e) Policy
How to think it through
Options: withdraw; refuse and keep it on record; seek written orders; escalate to Chief Secretary/Home Secretary; share with central agencies (MHA, IB) via proper channel; leak to media (no). Choose: politely refuse to withdraw; ask for written order; place on file; forward to Principal Secretary Home / Chief Secretary; family concerns (mother's cancer treatment, children school) – transfer risk acknowledged. Dilemmas: career and family vs national security; obedience vs duty. Policy: border fencing, smart fencing (CIBMS), BSF accountability, biometric verification, document fraud crackdown (Aadhaar forgery), Foreigners Tribunals (Assam), diplomatic engagement, humane treatment, NRC debate (careful), Immigration and Foreigners Act 2025.
Model answer
Stakeholders
- Citizens of the border State; the infiltrating families; border security personnel; officials who forged documents; Ramesh and his family; the State and the nation.
Dilemmas
- National security vs career and family's stability; obedience vs duty; loyalty to superiors vs the Constitution.
Options
- Withdraw; refuse quietly; refuse and seek written orders; escalate through proper channels.
Ramesh's report is not an opinion. Two families were caught red-handed, with forged Aadhaar, ration and voter cards. Withdrawing a fact does not make it untrue; it only makes it unsafe.
(a) Options
1. Withdraw the report as instructed. 2. Refuse, and say nothing more. 3. Refuse politely and ask for written orders to withdraw.
4. Escalate to the Principal Secretary (Home) or Chief Secretary, and through them to central agencies.
5. Leak it to the media.
(c) Evaluation
- Withdraw: protects posting and promotion, and his mother's treatment and children's schooling stay undisturbed. But a security breach and a forgery racket go unchecked.
- Refuse silently: keeps conscience clean, but the report can be buried.
- Written orders: few officers will put an illegal instruction on paper; it protects Ramesh.
- Escalate: ensures the information reaches those responsible for security.
- Media leak: breaks conduct rules and confidentiality; harms the investigation.
(b) My choice
- Combine 3 and 4: decline respectfully, ask for written orders, and send the report to the Principal Secretary (Home) with a request that it be shared with the Ministry of Home Affairs and the border force through proper channels.
- Accept that a transfer may follow, and arrange care for his mother and the children's schooling.
(d) Dilemmas
- Family welfare vs national security.
- Hierarchy vs truth.
- Career vs conscience.
(e) Policy measures
- Technology at the border: smart fencing and integrated surveillance.
- Accountability of border personnel: rotation, vigilance and strict action for connivance.
- Crack down on document fraud: audit of Aadhaar, ration and voter enrolment in vulnerable areas.
- Clear legal process: the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025 consolidates the law on entry and stay; apply it with due process and humane treatment.
- Diplomacy with the neighbour on return and border management.
Security depends on what officers report, not just on what fences stop.
Draw: A chain: border post → forged documents → settlement, with break points: technology, accountability, document audit.
Keywords, cases and data to drop in
infiltration, border connivance, forged Aadhaar ration voter cards, written orders, escalation, MHA, BSF, smart fencing, CIBMS, document audit, Immigration and Foreigners Act 2025, due process, humane treatment, career vs conscience.
Where most answers lose marks
- Choosing to withdraw 'for the family', or leaking to the media; the answer is to refuse in writing and escalate.
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.