Ms. X is a mid-level civil service official working in the urban development department of a major city. Recently, she was involved in approving a contract for a public infrastructure project — a new community park. During the approval process, she received a piece of confidential information indicating that one of the shortlisted contractors had a history of poor workmanship and allegations of corruption in other cities, though nothing had been legally proven. The Head of the Department, Mr. Y, advised her not to disclose this information to the project committee or the public because it could delay the project and damage the city's reputation. However, Ms. X believed that withholding such information compromised transparency and public trust.
What amongst the following should Ms. X do now?
1. Immediately disclose the information to the project committee and the public
2. Recommend removing the contractor from the shortlist to protect the project's integrity
3. Propose a 'limited disclosure' to an oversight committee, while keeping the information confidential from the public for the time being

Question

Ms. X is a mid-level civil service official working in the urban development department of a major city. Recently, she was involved in approving a contract for a public infrastructure project — a new community park. During the approval process, she received a piece of confidential information indicating that one of the shortlisted contractors had a history of poor workmanship and allegations of corruption in other cities, though nothing had been legally proven. The Head of the Department, Mr. Y, advised her not to disclose this information to the project committee or the public because it could delay the project and damage the city's reputation. However, Ms. X believed that withholding such information compromised transparency and public trust.

What amongst the following should Ms. X do now?

1. Immediately disclose the information to the project committee and the public

2. Recommend removing the contractor from the shortlist to protect the project's integrity

3. Propose a 'limited disclosure' to an oversight committee, while keeping the information confidential from the public for the time being

Quintessence Classes · Accepted Answer

The correct answer is 3 only. Here is an ethical and administrative analysis of why Option 3 is the most appropriate course of action, while Options 1 and 2 are flawed:Why Action 1 is inappropriate: Immediately making unproven allegations public violates official confidentiality protocols and can lead to defamation lawsuits. It could permanently ruin a company's reputation based on hearsay, creating a legal and administrative nightmare for the government before an official inquiry has even taken place.Why Action 2 is inappropriate: Removing the contractor from the shortlist based on unproven allegations, without giving them a fair hearing or a formal investigation, violates the principle of natural justice and fair play. This arbitrary decision-making could be legally challenged by the contractor, bringing the entire project to a standstill.Why Action 3 is the correct approach: Proposing a 'limited disclosure' to an internal oversight or vigilance committee balances all competing administrative values perfectly. It ensures institutional transparency (by not burying the info as the HOD suggested) and protects public trust, while simultaneously maintaining confidentiality and preventing premature public panic or legal liability. The oversight committee can then conduct a swift, objective verification of the claims.

Answer

1 and 2 only

Answer

2 and 3 only

Answer

1, 2 and 3

Answer & Explanation

About this question

UPSC CSE 2026 Prelims

Details

More Ethics questions

Practice 2,685+ more PYQs interactively