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
Select the answer using the code given below:
Statement 1 is Incorrect: The information received by Ms. X is confidential and the allegations are legally unproven. Immediately disclosing unverified information to the public violates the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules regarding confidentiality. It could lead to defamation, unwarranted public panic, and legal repercussions for the department. Statement 2 is Incorrect: Recommending the removal of the contractor based solely on unproven allegations and hearsay violates the principles of due process and natural justice. Decisions in public administration must be objective and evidence-based. Arbitrarily removing a contractor without a formal investigation undermines fair competition norms and the legal rights of the contractor. Statement 3 is Correct: Proposing a limited disclosure to an oversight committee or internal vigilance mechanism is the most ethical and administratively sound course of action. It balances the need for transparency and integrity with the requirement of confidentiality. This allows the proper institutional channels to verify the facts and conduct an investigation before any executive action is taken, without causing unnecessary project delays or public controversy. Therefore, option B is the correct answer.