You are a senior officer in the Ministry of Environment. A file has come to you seeking environment clearance for a big industrial project in an ecologically sensitive zone. You have been requested by the project promoters as well as the political representatives of the region, to accord clearance on priority, as the project runs into several thousands of crores of rupees and has the potential of generating large number of employments and altering the economic landscape of the region. On examining the proposal you find that it fully complies to the present norms of environment clearance. But you are aware that these norms were formulated four years ago. Besides, there is an environmental report of two NGOs presented to the Ministry about such ecologically sensitive regions, which are under consideration. Under such circumstances, which of the following course of action would you consider appropriate?

2.5 marks for option (c) 1 mark for option (a) & (d) 0 marks for option (b) Rationale/ Reasoning (c) Getting the project evaluated in light of the concerns expressed in the report of NGOs is the best course of action. It strikes a balance between economic need and ecological concern. (a) & (d) Granting approval to the project or rejecting it altogether is reflective of a bias either way and hence not the most appropriate course of action. According approval is legally tenable but fails to take into account environment concerns which may be existing but not as yet accepted/ acknowledged by the government. Holding all proposals till new norms are floated is reflective of excessive cautious approach which may badly dent the economy. (b) Outright rejection of the project is unjust as it duly complies to the present environmental norms. As such, it is an inappropriate choice. Principles/ Values tested  Sense of equity, fairness and balance of judgement.