(Lack of team orientation) (Not to create internal noise) You are serving as the Additional Commissioner in the Rural Development Department of a large state. During a departmental process audit, a probationary officer known for diligence and integrity submits a detailed note flagging irregularities in a flagship housing scheme. • Evidence of false beneficiary lists from a particular block • Ghost households listed as recipients • Bank transfers routed through shell accounts • Endorsements traced to the District Project Director (DPD) a senior officer widely respected for administrative efficiency and considered close to key political figures When you raise the matter informally with the DPD, she acknowledges "procedural shortcuts," citing pressure to meet targets and disbursement deadlines under intense political scrutiny. She urges you not to "derail the department's momentum on an avoidable audit loop." Over the next few days: * The whistleblower is transferred from audit duty and his probation report is flagged for "lack of team orientation." * Senior colleagues privately advise you not to "create internal noise" or "pit juniors against seniors." * A senior secretary tells you, "In service, discretion is as important as principle." You are not required by law to escalate unless you detect criminal conspiracy but you know the evidence points to more than clerical lapses. You're aware that your silence will signal complicity. Escalating the matter may create friction with senior officers, damage reputations, and isolate both you and the whistleblower but inaction risks eroding the ethical backbone of the institution. 1. What are the key ethical issues in this case? 2. What are your options as the Additional Commissioner? 3. What would be your chosen course of action, and why? 4. How can civil servants uphold integrity when informal hierarchies and peer pressure discourage ethical action?

Answered by 1 topper · CSE 2023

Syllabus: Case Studies on above issues.