GS4 · 20 marks · 250 words

You are appointed as an officer heading the Air Quality Compliance Division of the Environment Pollution Control Board in Delhi-NCR. The region is witnessing alarming levels of air pollution, which typically worsen during the winter months due to various meteorological and anthropogenic factors. The situation has led to severe public health concerns, particularly affecting vulnerable groups such as the elderly, children, and those with respiratory illnesses. The Supreme Court has also raised serious concern over the deteriorating air quality in Delhi-NCR and has directed the administration to take immediate and effective measures to control pollution, especially during the winter months. Your jurisdiction has a large number of small and medium-scale industries that were granted environmental clearance over the years. These industries form the backbone of the local economy and provide employment to a significant number of migrant workers. However, recent inspections and air quality monitoring reports indicate that a significant number of these units are operating in violation of prescribed air emission norms. As part of targeted measures to curb air pollution, you issued notices to all identified polluting units, directing them to apply for fresh environmental clearance certificates from the competent authority. However, your decision triggered strong opposition from a section of industrial units, labour unions, and local politicians. Industrial owners argued that such action would lead to production shutdowns, financial losses, and shortages of their products in the market. Labour unions and workers also protested, fearing mass unemployment and livelihood insecurity. Local politicians and vested interests accused you of jeopardising the socio-economic stability of the region. You received representations from various quarters urging you to withdraw the notices and not initiate harsh measures, citing the interests of multiple stakeholders. Additionally, you began receiving anonymous threats, aimed at coercing you into reversing your decision. On the other hand, several of your colleagues supported your stance, encouraging you to act in the larger public interest. Several local NGOs and environmental groups rallied behind your actions, demanding the immediate closure of polluting units. a. Under the given conditions, what are the options available to you? b. Critically evaluate each of the options listed by you. c. What are the ethical dilemmas being faced by you?

Answered by 5 toppers · CSE 2025

Syllabus: Case Studies on above issues.

How toppers approached it

From all 5 answers · about 300 words · 40% drew a diagram.

Opening

  • No separate opening100%

Body

  • Points and prose100%

Close

  • No separate close60%
  • A quotation20%
  • A way forward20%

The toppers’ answers

A R RajahAIR 7 · CSE 2025 · 346 wordsTheir whole copy

Opening

The above mentioned case study is a clear example of an ethical dilemma which also reflects the age old debate of environment vs. development.

Options available

Option - 1 -> Sticking to duty and maintaining the notices for environmental clearance.

Option - 2 -> Withdrawal of all the notices and allowing continuation of the industries.

Option - 3 -> Extending the time-period of compliance after stakeholder consultation.

Option - 4 -> Requesting for a transfer to ensure personal well-being (due to life threat)

Body · points and prose

b) Critical Evaluation

Option - 1 Pros -> (1) Upholding the Duty Principle of Kant. (2) Upholding values of integrity and sticking to job rules. (3) Environmental welfare and deep ecology Cons -> (1) Puts back the economic development. -> (2) Employment of labour is affected. -> (3) Personal life in danger.

Option - 2 Pros -> (1) Does not affect economic development. (2) Labourers keep their jobs. Cons -> (1) Going against SC-order. (2) Anthropocentric approach. (3) Environmental NGOs might protest -> disruption.

Option - 3 Pros -> (1) Upholding SC Order (2) Duty Principle of Kant upheld. (3) Sufficient time given to the industries. (4) labourers not affected in short-term. (5) Air pollution will be curbed in future. Cons -> (1) Time might not be sufficient to achieve targets for companies. (2) Might cause delay in implementation of SC-order

Option - 4 Pros -> Personal well-being. Cons -> (1) Buck-passing of responsibility. (2) leads to lack of courage and fortitude. (3) continuation of prevalent problems in Delhi-NCR.

c) Ethical Dilemmas (1) Deep Ecology vs. Anthropocentric This is the tussle between tackling air pollution and managing people's interests. (2) Livelihood of employees vs. carrying out duty The carrying out of orders jeopardises the employees. (3) Personal well-being vs. Duty-bound Doing duty might affect life personally (anonymous coercions). (4) Political Conformity vs. Doing Job Political campaign against the officer leads to impediments in doing job. (5) Economic development vs. pollution

Close

need for balancing both tenets. Thus, to achieve NDC targets of India, the air pollution measures have to be taken in Delhi-NCR.

More on Environmental Ethics

Obligation towards the non-human and the unborn: sustainability, animal welfare, intergenerational equity, development against ecology.

All GS4 questions on Environmental Ethics