When the State acts as a service provider, it assumes a duty of care toward citizens that goes beyond mere administration. Examine the regulatory and accountability challenges that

GS2 Government Policies
When the State acts as a service provider, it assumes a duty of care toward citizens that goes beyond mere administration. Examine the regulatory and accountability challenges that arise when government departments operate commercial tourism services.

Examine

  • 15 marks
  • 8 min
  • 250 words
  • Medium

The Hindu

Read article →

Duty of Care in State-Run Services

  • When the State provides commercial services, it owes a heightened duty of care under Article 21 (right to life) and public law liability.
  • Citizens are rights-holders, reinforced by the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and principles of natural justice.

Regulatory Challenges

  • Conflict of Interest (Operator = Regulator) Government departments running tourism services often self-regulate, diluting independent oversight (e.g., state-run cruise operations).
  • Fragmented Legal Framework The Inland Vessels Act, 2021 with varied State rules creates non-uniform safety standards; absence of a dedicated water tourism code.
  • Weak Preventive Protocols Gaps in pre-departure checks, weather compliance, and crew certification indicate a regulatory vacuum.

Accountability Challenges

  • Lack of Enforceable SOPs Safety lapses (e.g., inaccessible life jackets, poor training) show absence of binding protocols; post-incident actions are often ad hoc.
  • Delayed Emergency Response Inadequate last-mile preparedness leads to golden hour losses, undermining the right to timely rescue.
  • Discretionary Compensation Ex-gratia payments lack statutory basis, unlike structured compensation regimes; accountability remains executive-driven.

Analysis

  • Unlike private operators (subject to strict liability and consumer courts), State entities often benefit from diffused accountability, creating a paradox where higher duty meets lower enforceability (Nilabati Behera v. State of Odisha, 1993: compensation for State negligence).

Conclusion

  • The State as a commercial operator must meet higher, not lower, standards of accountability.
  • Reforms should include separation of regulatory and operational roles, mandatory third-party safety audits, uniform national safety standards, and statutory compensation frameworks, ensuring that public service delivery aligns with constitutional guarantees of safety and dignity.