“Sneha is a Senior Manager working for a big reputed hospital chain in a mid-sized city. She has been made in charge of the new super specialty center that the hospital is building with state-of-the art equipment and world-class medical facilities. The building has been reconstructed and she is starting the process of procurement for various equipment and machine. As the head of the committee responsible for procurement, she has invited bids from all the interested reputed vendors dealing in medical equipment. She notices that her brother, who is a well-known supplier of this domain, has sent his expression interest. Since the hospital privately not mandatory for her to select only the lower bidder. Also, she is aware that her brother’s company has been facing some financial difficulties and a big supply order will help him recover. At the same time, allocating the contract to her brother might bring charges of favouritism against her and tarnish her image. The hospital management trusts her fully and would support any decision of hers. (a)What should be Sneha’s course of action? (b)How would she justify what she chooses to do ? (c)In this case, how is medical ethics compromised with vested personal interest ?”
This question is available to read here. The practice button generates a fresh question from the same paper. Here, practise an answer plan in keywords. Choose your timer on the next screen. Feedback uses our common 15-point practice rubric, rather than the paper’s original mark allocation.
The Supreme Court of India has issued a stay on an Allahabad High Court order that directed the personal recovery of ₹5 lakh from the Noida District Magistrate (DM) in relation to a detention case under the National Security Act (NSA). The High Court had imposed the penalty as compensation for the wrongful detention of an individual, citing procedural lapses. In the Supreme Court, senior counsel argued that the decision-making process for such detentions involves a multi-tiered administrative review, involving various officials and legal vetting, which makes it legally contentious to single out a specific civil servant for personal financial liability for an official act. This case brings into focus the delicate balance between judicial oversight of administrative actions and the protection of civil servants acting in the course of their official duties.
At the seventy-second National Film Awards ceremony held at Ekta Nagar near the Statue of Unity, President Droupadi Murmu commended the Indian cinema industry for its expansive cultural reach while issuing a sharp caution against endorsing harmful health products. Emphasizing that a true star spreads light rather than darkness, the President highlighted the profound moral and social responsibilities borne by public figures whose commercial choices directly shape public health, impressionable youth, and societal values.
On September 29, 2026, the United States announced a zero-percent tariff regime for specific categories of speciality drugs imported from 20 nations, including India. This policy adjustment targets life-saving pharmaceutical segments, including gene therapies, cell therapies, antibody-drug conjugates, rare disease medications, and infertility treatments. By removing tariff barriers for these complex medical products, the U.S. aims to diversify its pharmaceutical supply chains and lower costs for advanced healthcare. For India, the 'pharmacy of the world', this decision creates a significant incentive to transition beyond traditional generic manufacturing toward high-value biopharmaceuticals and complex medicinal components.