First Encounter with UPSC

UPSC Civil Services Interview Transcript

28th Match,2016.Arvind Saxena Board.Afternoon time .2nd one to go for interview.Posting only the Questions to make read easy.

Me:May I come in sir?

Chairman:Yes come in.

Me:Good Afternoon mam,good afternoon sirs.

Chairman:Ashutosh have a seat.So you are graduate from IIT Roorkee.

Me:Thank you Sir.Yes Sir.

Chairman:Ashutosh why do you want to come to the civil services after engineering?

Chairman:Have you heard of world cultural festival organised in Delhi?What were its environmental impacts?

Chairman:Why is so much emphasis given to floodplain being destroyed?What so special about it?

Lady member:Have you heard about COP21?

Lady member:What is the difference in stand between developed and developing countries?

Lady member:Whats your take on that?Who is correct?

Lady member:Are you with what happened in Paris?Is it good for India?

Lady Member:What is being done to clean Ganga?

Lady member:Why is there no result on the ground?

Member 2:So you are from IIT.So many IIT graduates come to civil services.Don’t you think the brain drain is happening?

Member 2:Isn’t this affecting the corporate world?

Member 2:Your optional is Geography?You might have travelled in India a lot?

Member 2:Have you seen map of India?Tell me the rivers you need to cross while travelling from Delhi to Kanyakumari?

Member 3:What is this “Make in India”?What is being done by government to make “make in India ” a success?

Member 3:What is the difference between “Make in India” and “Make for India”?

Member 3 :How to make “Make for India” possible?

Member 3:We stand so low on “Ease of doing business”.There is also a report related to it.What is government doing for it?

Member 3:Foreign companies which will come to India will need to do import-export?What are hindrances to that?

Member 3:Have you heard of single window in import-export?

Member 4:You might been taught by good Profs in IIT.What are the reasons their are vacancies in teaching in IITs?

Member 4:What should be done for attracting Profs?

Member 4:Why only curious about environment related issues?Is it child like curiousity?

Member 4:Have you heard of “Public Trust doctrine” in environment ?

Chairman: I have noticed a unique thing in your profile.You have filled DANICS(Group B) service as your 3rd choice,above many Group A services.Why this is so?

Chairman:Thank you Ashutosh,your Interview is over.

My interview lasted around 25 mins.Board was very cordial and all smiling except the lady member.She was expression-less.Chairman was noticing my every answer and movement and expression.He had a pleasant smile on his face.

Hoping for the best!!!

Is Sting Operation An Invasion To Privacy?

“We are free but still bound by chains.”

Can this be a valid argument in the present context? We are definitely free with no physical barriers. But it would not be incorrect to say that a man is bound by many constraints. These constraints could be emotional, financial, ideological, psychological etc. But where does an invasion to individual’s privacy fit within these constraints? It would be very valid argument to place that an infringement in privacy would create all sorts of constraints for an individual. With this background, let’s delve upon the issue whether sting operation is an invasion to privacy or not?

This debate has been going on since long, but it took fast pace since last three to four years. It took the tide when CIA was alleged for doing surveillance of communication systems of various heads of Nations. And in the recent past, with the growing instances of corruption, governments have come out with various sting techniques to get catch hold of culprits or suspects. Technology has also played its part. With the growing Internet traffic and its misuse, e-Surveillance is being done by various state agencies. The issue is whether doing sting is legal or illegal. And if it is legal, to what extent and by what means? What would be its implications on an individual’s privacy? These are some of the questions we would be trying to answer in subsequent parts of the essay. It would be very imperative to start with “Sting Operation” and then moving to the issue of “Privacy”. And finally looking on the relationship between the two and its implications.

Sting Operations can be definitely said to be the measures taken to protect or prevent something unethical and adversarial, provided it being bonafide. The concerned party on which the sting is done does not possess any knowledge that he is being watched upon. Sting operations may be lawful or unlawful. Issue is to what extent sting operation being is done? In India, it has been justified to an extent to prevent corruption, evading terrorism etc. Due to growing instances of collusive and cohesive corruption, terrorist activities, communal violence, hate speech, overthrowing of legitimate government, States have become bound to do surveillance to check unlawful activities. Sting could be done by various methods. It could be telephone tapping, Internet traffic surveillance or by physical means. “Physical means” could include voice & video recording and catching red-hand. In India, NETRA and CMS are two of the many techniques used by the State to do surveillance. Certainly the issue of Privacy comes to picture while judging the legitimacy of a Sting operation.

Everybody is born free and by virtue of his “Being”, he has some immutable rights. And Privacy is one of them. Everybody has inherent right to enjoy privacy which has been accorded to him. When sting operation is done, whatever may be the purpose “Right to Privacy” is being infringed upon. If he is informed or warned beforehand about the surveillance, he would become conscious regarding it. And to an extent, the potential adversarial condition or activity might be avoided. When somebody knows that he is being watched, he would restrain from doing unlawful activities like terrorism, corruption etc.

Our Constitution also guarantees “Right to Privacy”. Though it has not been explicitly mentioned in the text, it has been accorded the status of a Right by various interpretations of Article 21 of Indian Constitution by Supreme Court. But it is not a right in absolute sense. It has various exceptions associated with it such as “in the interest of national security, sovereignty of the country etc. where it could be curtailed. So it becomes “Categorical Imperative” for the State to protect the Nation from all sorts of contingencies or bad situations. By this virtue, conducting surveillance and sting operations comes within the very ambit of larger public interest. Taking history as a clue, spies were deployed for gathering intelligence during the time of Chandragupta Maurya under the guidance of Kautilya. But those were the times of autocracy. Today the situation has changed upside down. We are living in the world of democracy and era of “Rights by virtue of being”. Individual is supreme. His supremacy is maintained by valuable respect for his rights.

If the stings are conducted for the larger interest of the Nation and public welfare, it has to be done under the ambit of law. It would be unlawful if done extra-constitutionally. It would also be unethical and not moral, if conducted without the consent of citizens. And on the other extreme, if citizens are informed about conduction of surveillance (each and every time it is being done), whole purpose would be lost. So, one of the alternatives could be that to bring sting operation and surveillance within legal boundaries. Agency conducting sting operations should be accountable to the Parliament. Misuse or improper use should be checked. If misused, consequent legal proceedings should be done for the violation of rights.

Conflict Of Power Between Executive and Legislature

Indian State is made up of three organs i.e. Legislature,Executive and Judiciary.Primarily there functions are policy formulation,policy implementation and policy adjudication respectively.All the three organs of the government work within their spheres under normal circumstances.Although an effective coordination and cooperation has to be maintained between these three organs for the well functioning of the government and upholding the democratic values.Working within their own boundaries help in protecting the autonomy and integrity of the different organs of the government.This feature has been implicitly mentioned in the Indian Constitution.It owes it origin to the theory of “Separation of Powers” propounded by French Philosopher Montesquieu.At the same time “Doctrine of Checks and Balance” has also been incorporated in the Indian Constitution to keep a check on the misuse of the power given to different organs of Government.

In India,People of the country are Sovereign.They exercise their supreme power by electing the legislators from their respective constituencies.In this way these legislators are the representatives of the people in the Parliament or legislative Assemblies.Their function is to raise issues related to the people and provide solutions for them by formulating laws,regulations and rules etc.Once the policy has been formulated,Bureaucracy is the body which implements these policies.It is the prerogative of the executive how to implement and monitor the scheme.Issues related to functioning such degree of implementation could be raised in the legislature but could not be directly monitored by the legislators as this is clear clash of powers between Executive and Legislature.

Recently,Saansad Adarsh Gram Yojana has been launched by Prime Minister Narendra Modi.In this Scheme each Member of Parliament will take the responsibility of developing physical and institutional infrastructure in three villages by 2019,Out of which one has to be achieved within 2016.Thereafter, five such Adarsh Grams (one per year) will be selected and developed by 2024.It envisages integrated development of the selected village across multiple areas such as agriculture,health, education, sanitation, environment, livelihoods etc.The district Collector will be the nodal officer for implementing the SAGY.He will conduct a monthly review meeting with representatives of the participating Line Departments.The Members of Parliament concerned will chair the review meetings.

Similar is the MPLADS(MP-local Area Development) and MLA-LADS Scheme,Five Crore Rupees and around Four crore rupees(varies with state to state) is with the MP Fund and MLA Fund respectively to spend in their respective constituencies for the developmental Work.What Work to be done,where is to be done,how it is to be done is the sole discretion of the legislator.

These type of Schemes have very serious flaw within themselves.Bureaucrats are the selected authorities by the government for the implementation,given their vast experience in the ground work,but their powers are being overridden by sharing or out-rightly taken by legislators by way of monitoring and reviewing & Chairing the meetings by them.Although legislators represent the people of constituencies but there is high likely possibility of Unfair implementation by them.As they are being elected by the people,they would like to work or provide advantage to people to gain maximum political benefits.Clearly this is not in the larger public interest.At the same time,Bureaucracy is Politically neutral,it works in the best interest of the people regarding implementation.MP-LAD Scheme is the breeding ground of Corruption at the local level.Funds are being misused or not being used at all.It leads to Politician-Business Nexus in awarding of contracts etc.

After all tax-payers money is being drained which could have been judiciously used for the welfare of the people.In India,Policy formulation is not the problem but its poor Implementation is the problem.Their is a serious need for the ratification of this problem.As the 2nd ARC(Adminstrative Reforms Commission,2005) has recommended of total scrapping of MP-LAD type Schemes and recently too debate is going on.But this is not the only Solution to the problem.Bringing out minor Changes to it would lead to better results.One Solution to this could be:Funds which come under the MPs/MLAs should be transferred to District Collector and the sole discretion for withdrawal from it should be that of him.Constituency Level Advisory Committee consisting of MP/MLA and some active civil Society members should be formed for advising the District Collector regarding the usage of Funds,but the advise tendered should not be binding on him.This will not only provide inputs for proper use of funds and at the same time,give the opportunity to DC to implement fairly without any political Bias and prejudice.Discussion & deliberation of the Scheme could always be done in the legislation which will lead to pointing out good and bad Implementation and will give the space to government for further modifications.