View answer copy →Answered a very similar question
Their question: “Accountability mechanisms vs bureaucratic delays/efficiency; can a balance be struck”
The 2015 PYQ is precisely the accountability-mechanisms-cause-decision-paralysis dichotomy; Aayushi's answer balancing accountability tools (RTI, DBT, mandamus) against efficiency shows how to resolve it.
Key learnings from their answer
- ›She grounds ethics arguments in specific legal and governance hooks rather than leaving them theoretical, K.C. Puttaswamy & Article 21 and the DPDP Act for the AI-privacy answer (Q14), DBT/RTI/mandamus writ for accountability-vs-efficiency (Q5), CPGRAMS and Citizen Charters like LIC/IRCTC for governance (Q1/Q5). Lesson: tying an ethical point to a real judgment, Act or scheme turns it from opinion into a defensible, administration-aware answer.
- ›She closes answers on a deliberate value-laden maxim that fits the question, 'Yogakshema' for the welfare-state accountability answer (Q5), 'Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam' for global inequality (Q8), Aristotelian 'eudaimonia' for the AI-policy answer (Q14), 'Nari Shakti' for women's participation (Q13). Lesson: a short, topic-matched maxim as your last line gives Ethics answers a memorable 'signature' ending, but pick one that actually maps to the question, not a stock phrase.
What they cited: DBT reducing approval delays; RTI speeding implementation; mandamus writ / judicial accountability (Q5)
Quotes used: “'Yogakshema' (welfare state) [Q5]”

