a. Ethical Issues in Re-appropriation of Funds

The re-appropriation of funds from the National Housing Scheme (NHS) to other developmental projects raises several ethical concerns:

1. Impact on Vulnerable Groups: The NHS is specifically designed to aid the weaker sections of society. Diverting ₹6000 crores from this scheme could significantly delay or even halt the housing projects for the economically disadvantaged, directly impacting their well-being and access to essential housing.
2. Transparency and Accountability: The decision to re-appropriate funds might not be fully transparent. If the re-allocation is perceived as politically motivated, especially in the context of upcoming elections, it could undermine public trust in the government’s commitment to welfare schemes.
3. Political Sensitivity: The timing and nature of the fund diversion are politically sensitive. Such decisions may be driven more by electoral gains rather than genuine developmental needs, compromising ethical governance principles.
4. International and National Repercussions: While funding the SEZ and the MNC project is crucial for economic development, neglecting the NHS raises concerns about prioritizing short-term political and international interests over long-term social welfare.

b. Options Available to Rajesh Kumar

Given the ethical and practical challenges, Rajesh Kumar has several options:

1. Propose Alternative Funding: Rajesh Kumar could explore alternative sources of funding for the SEZ and gas processing plant, such as reallocating funds from less critical projects or increasing revenue through other means, to avoid impacting NHS.
2. Recommend Phased Funding: Suggesting a phased funding approach for both SEZ and MNC projects could allow for partial allocation while preserving NHS funds. This would ensure that critical projects proceed without compromising welfare initiatives.
3. Advocate for Supplementary Budget: Rajesh Kumar could recommend the presentation of a supplementary budget to secure additional funds for the SEZ and gas project without affecting the NHS allocation.
4. Document and Report Concerns: If these alternatives are not feasible, documenting the ethical concerns and the potential impact on NHS could be crucial. This documentation should be communicated to senior officials and relevant committees, ensuring transparency and accountability.

Is Resigning a Worthy Option?

Resigning should be considered a last resort. If Rajesh Kumar finds that all avenues for ethical solutions are exhausted and he is unable to uphold the principles of transparency and welfare, resignation could be a principled stance. However, before taking such a step, he should thoroughly explore all possible avenues to mitigate the negative impact and ensure that his concerns are adequately addressed. Resignation might not be the most practical option unless it serves a clear purpose in highlighting systemic issues or advocating for ethical governance.