13 October: direct benefit transfer
Tuesday 13 October 2026
GS Paper 2 · 150 words · 10 marks
Reforming the government delivery system through the Direct Benefit Transfer Scheme is a progressive step, but it has its limitations too. Comment.
(UPSC Mains 2022, GS Paper 2, Q8)
Set a timer for 7 minutes. Write your answer before you read anything below.
Open only after you have written
How to approach this question
What the question asks.
| Part | What to write |
|---|---|
| A progressive step | Two or three gains, each with a scheme |
| It has its limitations | Two or three limits, each with a case |
| Comment | Your judgement on balance, and a fix |
A shape that works in 150 words.
- One line on what DBT is and when it began.
- Gains, with named schemes.
- Limits, with named cases.
- A conclusion that fixes the biggest limit.
What to avoid.
| Mistake | What to do instead |
|---|---|
| A savings figure you are not sure of | Name the mechanism instead, such as removing duplicate names |
| Gains with no scheme named | Name PAHAL, PM-KISAN or a state scheme |
| Limits that are vague, like "technical issues" | Say which failure, and who it hurts |
| Ending on "DBT has great potential" | Name a fix |
A model answer
Direct Benefit Transfer, launched in January 2013, pays benefits straight into beneficiaries' bank accounts. It has cut leakage. Its limits fall hardest on the people it is meant to serve.
Why it is a progressive step
- The JAM trinity (Jan Dhan accounts, Aadhaar, mobile) removes middlemen.
- PAHAL, the LPG subsidy scheme, removed duplicate and fake connections.
- PM-KISAN pays eligible farmers Rs 6,000 a year in three instalments, with no intermediary.
Its limitations
- Exclusion by design: PM-KISAN goes to landholders, so tenant farmers miss out.
- Authentication failures: when a fingerprint does not match, a genuine beneficiary can be denied rations.
- The last mile: rural account holders may travel far to withdraw money.
- Cash cannot replace goods when local prices rise.
Conclusion
DBT should continue. Every scheme needs an offline fallback when authentication fails, and a grievance process with a fixed deadline.
Word count: 140.
Why this answer works. It covers both halves and judges them. Each gain names a scheme. Each limit says who is hurt and how. The conclusion offers two fixes, each aimed at a limit named above.
Where it could be stronger. It could cite a study of authentication failures in one state, if you know the source.