CameraIcon
CameraIcon
SearchIcon
MyQuestionIcon
MyQuestionIcon
Question

Government had allocated 42 crores for the upliftment of Pahadi Korwas, a tribal community. Under this project, a road was developed in the Kach Ketha village costing Rs.17.44 lakhs. However, the officials failed to notice that there was only one Korwa family in that village and they were suffering from acute water shortage. Also, these funds were grossly misappropriated as only 'Lal Mitti' was put over a Kutcha road. As Ramdas says, "Instead of spending Rs.17.44 lakhs of that road, if they had spent a few thousands on improving the damaged well on my land, wouldn't that have been better?"

(i) What according to you would have truly benefitted Ramdas Korwa— developing the road or improving the well?

(ii) Rs.17.44 lakhs were spent on developing the road. Is this cost justified?

(iii) What values do you find disturbing in the above case?

Open in App
Solution

(i) I think that Ramdas Korwa would have benefitted if the well on his field was improved because it would have ensured year-long availability of water and would have helped him to increase his agricultural output.

(ii) No, I don't think that this cost is justified. The road built was not `Pucca'. Only Lal Mitti was put over a Kutcha road. This clearly indicates that funds were misappropriated.

(iii) The problems with this case are:

  • Total disregard towards the needs of the poor people
  • Gross negligence
  • Corruption

flag
Suggest Corrections
thumbs-up
1
BNAT
mid-banner-image
similar_icon
Similar questions
View More