IN THE HIGH COURT OF AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

WEDNESDAY,THE 07TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 16TH KARTHIKA, 1940

WP(C).No. 29113 of 2016

PETITIONER:

DR.HAMZA .V.K S/O.ABOOBACKER (LATE), VATTAMKANDATHIL HOUSE, CHUNDAMBATTA POST, -679337.

BY ADVS. SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ KUM.A.ARUNA

RESPONDENTS: 1 ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY, ALIGARH, UP - 202002.

2 THE REGISTRAR ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY,ALIGARH, UP - 202002.

3 THE VICE CHANCELLOR ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY,ALIGARH, UP - 202002.

4 JOINT REGISTRAR ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY, ALIGARH, UP - 202002.

5 THE DIRECTOR, ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY, CENTRE, CHERUKARA POST, CHELAMALA, , MALAPPURAM - 679340

6 MS.LUBNA ANSARI ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY, MALAPPURAM CENTRE, CHERUKARA POST,CHELAMALA, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM - 679340

7 MS. MOHAMMED YASHIK P ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY, MALAPPURAM CENTRE, CHERUKARA POST,CHELAMALA, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM - 679340. W.P.(C) Nos.29113/2016 & 3949/2017 2

8 MR. SHAFEEQUE REHMAN K.V ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY, MALAPPURAM CENTRE, CHERUKARA POST, CHELAMALA, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM - 679340.

9 MR. SYED AHMED SAAD ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY, MALAPPURAM CENTRE, CHERUKARA POST, CHELAMALA, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM - 679340.

BY ADVS. SMT.SANJEETHA K.A., SC, ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY SMT.AMRIN FATHIMA SRI.E.C.AHAMED FAZIL SRI.T.M.BINOY SMT.M.A.VAHEEDA BABU SMT.M.SHAJNA SMT.UMMUL FIDA SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH SRI.J.RAMKUMAR SRI.K.M.FAISAL (KALAMASSERY) SRI.K.M.FIROZ SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON SRI.MITHUN BABY JOHN SRI.P.U.VINOD KUMAR

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07.11.2018, ALONG WITH WP(C)No.3949/2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) Nos.29113/2016 & 3949/2017 3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

WEDNESDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 16TH KARTHIKA, 1940

WP(C).No.3949 of 2017

PETITIONER/S:

RINOJ P.K. CHODATHIL HOUSE, PANNENPARA, CHALAD P.O, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670 014.

BY ADVS. SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY SMT.K.N.REMYA SMT.L.ANNAPOORNA SMT.N.SANTHA SRI.K.A.BALAN SRI.PETER JOSE CHRISTO SRI.S.A.ANAND SRI.S.DEEPAK SRI.V.VARGHESE

RESPONDENT/S:

1 ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY ALIGARH(UP), PIN 202 002, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.

2 VICE CHANCELLOR ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY, ALIGARH(UP), PIN 202 002.

3 REGISTRAR ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY, ALIGARH(UP), PIN 202 002.

4 DIRECTOR ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY, MALAPPURAM CENTRE, CHERUKARA P.O,PERINTHALMANNA (VIA), , PIN 679 340., W.P.(C) Nos.29113/2016 & 3949/2017 4

5 LUBNA ANSARI ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION,FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES AND RESEARCH, ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY, MALAPPURAM CENTRE, CHERUKARA P.O, PERINTHALMANNA (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT , PIN - 679 340.

6 MOHAMMED YASHIK P ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES AND RESEARCH,ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY,MALAPPURAM CENTRE, CHERUKARA P.O, PERINTHALMANNA (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679 340.

7 SHAFEEQU REHMAN K.V ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION,FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES AND RESEARCH, ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY, MALAPPURAM CENTRE, CHERUKARA P.O, PERINTHALMANNA (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT , PIN - 679 340.

8 SYED AHMED SAAD, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION,FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES AND RESEARCH, ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY, MALAPPURAM CENTRE, CHERUKARA P.O, PERINTHALMANNA (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT , PIN - 679 340.

BY ADVS. SMT.SANJEETHA K.A., SC, ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY SMT.AMRIN FATHIMA SRI.T.M.BINOY SMT.M.A.VAHEEDA BABU SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH SRI.J.RAMKUMAR SRI.K.M.FAISAL (KALAMASSERY) SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON SRI.MITHUN BABY JOHN SRI.P.U.VINOD KUMAR

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07.11.2018, ALONG WITH WP(C)No.29113/2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) Nos.29113/2016 & 3949/2017 5

J U D G M E N T

These writ petitions are filed by the candidates who have applied for selection to the post of Assistant Professor in Management Studies &

Research in Aligarh Muslim University at Malappuram Centre. The selection was mainly challenged on the ground of non adherence to the UGC norms.

This Court initially heard the matter and reserved the judgment. Thereafter, it was posted as to be spoken to in view of the fact that this Court need to examine the selection criteria adopted by the University. Accordingly, the matter was reheard again after perusing the original documents placed before this Court by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the University.

2. UGC Regulations on Minimum Qualifications for Appointment of

Teachers and other Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and

Measures for the Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education-2010

(hereinafter referred as UGC Regulations) and modified in 2013 govern the appointments. Regulation 3.2.0 prescribes that minimum qualifications required for the post of Assistant Professors will be those as prescribed by the UGC in the Regulations. Regulation 4.4.5 prescribes minimum qualifications for appointment of teaching faculty in Universities and Colleges for Management/Business Administration. The stipulation reads as follows: W.P.(C) Nos.29113/2016 & 3949/2017 6

“4.4.5. MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS FOR APPOINTMENT OF

TEACHING FACULTY IN UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES - MANAGEMENT/

BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION:

1. ASSISTANT PROFESSOR i. Essential: 1. First Class Masters Degree in Business Management/Administration/ in a relevant management related discipline or first class in two year full time PGDM declared equivalent by AIU / accredited by the AICTE / UGC;

OR

2. First Class graduate and professionally qualified Charted Accountant / Cost and Works Accountant / Company Secretary of the concerned statutory bodies. ii. Desirable:

1. Teaching, research, industrial and / or professional experience in a reputed organization; 2. Papers presented at Conferences and / or published in refereed journals.

3. Admittedly, the petitioners as well as the selected candidates possess the above qualifications. The dispute in these writ petitions is in regard to the selection procedure adopted by the Aligarh Muslim University.

Regulation 6.0.0 laid down the selection procedure which reads as follows:

6.0 .0 SELECTION PROCEDURES:

6.0.1 The overall selection procedure shall incorporate transparent, objective and credible methodology of analysis of the merits and credentials of the applicants based on weightages given to the performance of the candidate in different relevant dimensions and his/her performance on a scoring system proforma, based on the Academic Performance Indicators (API) as provided in this Regulations in Tables I to IX of Appendix III. W.P.(C) Nos.29113/2016 & 3949/2017 7

In order to make the system more credible, universities may assess the ability for teaching and/or research aptitude through a seminar or lecture in a class room situation or discussion on the capacity to use latest technology in teaching and research at the interview stage. These procedures can be followed for both direct recruitment and CAS promotions wherever selection committees are prescribed in these Regulations.

6.0.2 The Universities shall adopt these Regulations for selection committees and selection procedures through their respective statutory bodies incorporating the Academic Performance Indicator (API) based Performance Based Appraisal System (PBAS) at the institutional level for University Departments and their Constituent colleges/ affiliated colleges (Government/Government-aided/Autonomous/ Private Colleges) to be followed transparently in all the selection processes. An indicative PBAS template proforma for 36direct recruitment and for Career Advancement Schemes (CAS) based on API based PBAS shall also be sent separately by the UGC to the universities. The universities may adopt the template proforma or may devise their own self-assessment cum performance appraisal forms for teachers in strict adherence to the API criteria based PBAS prescribed in these Regulations....

4. As referred in Regulation 6.0.1, selection has to be made in accordance with Appendix-III Table -II(c). It is appropriate to refer the table.

APPENDIX-III TABLE -II(c)

Minimum scores for APIs for direct recruitment of teachers in university departments/Colleges, Librarian/Physical Education cadres in Universities/Colleges, and weightages in Selection Committees to be considered along with other specified eligibility qualifications stipulated in the Regulation. Assistant Professor/ Associate Professor/ Professor/ equivalent cadres equivalent cadres equivalent cadres (Stage 1) (Stage 4) (Stage 5) Minimum API Minimum Qualification as Consolidated API score Consolidated API Scores stipulated in these requirement of 300 points score requirement of regulations from category III of APIs 400 points from category III of APIs Selection a) Academic Record and a) Academic Background e) Academic Committee criteria/ Research Performance (20%) Background weightages (Total (50%) b) Research performance (20%) W.P.(C) Nos.29113/2016 & 3949/2017 8

Weightages = 100) b) Assessment of Domain based on API score and f) Research Knowledge and Teaching quality of publications performance based Skills (40%) on API score and (30%) c) Assessment of Domain quality of publications c) Interview performance Knowledge and Teaching (40%) (20%) Skills g) Assessment of (20%) Domain Knowledge d) Interview performance and Teaching Skills (20%) (20%) Interview performance: (20%) Note: For Universities/colleges for which Sixth PRC Awards (vide Appendix 2) are applicable, Stages 1, 4 and 5 correspond to scales with AGP of Rs.6000, 9000 and 10000 respectively

5. On a mere glance of the above table, it can be seen that the selection committee has to follow three criteria as referred to as a, b and c in the table in regard to the selection of Assistant Professor. The marks will have to be segregated for the components of Academic Record and

Research Performance (50%), Assessment of Domain Knowledge and

Teaching Skills (30%) and Interview performance (20%). In the matter of selection of Associate Professor and Professor, Academic Performance

Indicators (API) score will have to be tagged along with marks to be awarded by the selection committee. But in the selection of Assistant Professor, no such stipulation is made in the UGC Regulations. Therefore, once a candidate is found having minimum qualification the only criteria to be considered is the marks awarded by the selection committee. In this matter, the University awarded consolidated marks in the interview in the scale of 10. W.P.(C) Nos.29113/2016 & 3949/2017 9

This appears to have been awarded after adverting to the academic as well as other components as referred in the selection criteria without any segregation in different heads.

6. The stand of the University is that marks were awarded by the selection committee after adverting to the criteria as referred above and therefore, it does not suffer from any illegality.

7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioners would argue that the marks awarded by the selection committee are only based on the performance in the interview and no marks have been awarded under the criteria 'a and b' (Academic Record and Research Performance and

Assessment of Domain Knowledge and Teaching Skills).

8. On a perusal of the files produced before this Court, it can be seen that the selection committee had not followed the UGC Regulation in awarding marks. Awarding marks under the heads 'a and b' are based on the pre- existing factors. That means, those factors borne out of the Performance

Based Appraisal System made available by the candidates concerned for obtaining API score for consideration for selection. The UGC consciously fixed the maximum marks of 20% for interview to avoid arbitrariness. The

UGC Regulation itself stipulates that in Regulation 6.0.1 the University must incorporate transparent, objective and credible methodology in overall W.P.(C) Nos.29113/2016 & 3949/2017 10 selection process. The consolidated marks could not have been awarded in interview performance under the whole head of a to c. The University has to award marks separately under the category 'a and b' based on the records made available before the University. The marks could be awarded by the

University objectively based on the interview performance only under category 'c'.

9. I cannot accept the petitioners' argument that the marks now awarded by the University are to be treated as marks in the interview for the reason that there is no segregation for such marks by the selection committee. It is only when there is segregation of marks, it can be concluded that marks now awarded were based on the interview performance.

10. In what manner the selection committee has to award marks for the heads 'a and b' is the next question. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.29113 of

2016 has produced Ext.P13. Ext.P13 is a tabulation statement of assessment of marks. This was in the year 2011. It is not known why the selection committee departed from such method of assessment for selecting candidates pursuant to the notification which is under challenge in the writ petition. In view of the fact that if Ext.P13 was prevalent, the University is bound to follow the same method for the purpose of selection, it is always open for the University to prescribe the criteria not repugnant to the minimum W.P.(C) Nos.29113/2016 & 3949/2017 11 standard as prescribed under the UGC Regulations. The UGC had not defined the manner in which Academic Record and Research Performance will have to be assessed nor about the Assessment of Domain Knowledge and Teaching Skills in the teachers' scheme. It is appropriate for the

University to frame such norms consistent with the UGC Regulations.

Perhaps, for the reason that the University had not formulated such norms, it resulted in the present dilemma. Anyhow, as seen from Ext.P13, such assessment was already there in the University. It seems marks were given in 'age' factor as well. Going by the UGC Regulations, no mark can be awarded reckoning 'age' as a factor.

That being the case, following Ext.P13 produced in W.P.(C) No.29113 of

2016, the selection committee shall award the marks. Accordingly, the appointments of party respondents are set aside. However, they can continue till fresh selection is made. Fresh selection shall be made, based on the records already produced by the parties, within a period of two months. It is open for the University to constitute a new selection committee if the committee which form part of selecting respondents are not available. The continuation of the party respondents will be subject to the outcome of the proceedings of the selection committee. It is made clear that all the short listed applicants for interview pursuant to the notification shall be invited for W.P.(C) Nos.29113/2016 & 3949/2017 12 consideration by the selection committee. The selection committee shall select only such candidates who have been shortlisted for interview. The awarding of marks on criteria 'a and b' must be based on the pre existing factors as reflected in the records already produced along with the application.

These writ petitions are disposed of as above.

Sd/-

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

JUDGE

smp W.P.(C) Nos.29113/2016 & 3949/2017 13

APPENDIX OF WP(C) No.29113/2016

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 16.12.2015

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE POST OF ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN MANAGEMENT STUDIES & RESEARCH IN AMU CENTRE, MALAPPURAM

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 04.05.2016 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR THE POST IN AMU, MURSHIDABAD

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 04.05.2016 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR THE POST IN AMU, MALAPPURAM CENTRE

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE SHORT LIST WHICH SHOWS THE API SCORE OF EACH SHORT LISTED ASSISTA PROFESSOR

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 13.05.2016

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 01.06.2016

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.07.2016

EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE IN DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 03.04.2010

EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE JUNIOR RESEARCH FELLOW AWARD LETTER

EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE MEMORANDUM DATED 24/12/2016 ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY.

EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE TABLE SHOWING ACADEMIC ASSESSMENT ETC OF THE CANDIDATES. W.P.(C) Nos.29113/2016 & 3949/2017 14

EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE TABLE SHOWING THE MARKS OF THE PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 6 TO 9

EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF THE PERFORMA FOR SPECIALIZATION AND ELECTIVE PAPERS FOR THE MBA BATCH 2015- 17 IN ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY CENTRE, MALAPPURAM.

EXHIBIT P16 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY TO SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 2/5/2017 TOGETHER WITH DETAILED EXPLANATION TO POINT NO.3 OF THE REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON 24/3/2017.

EXHIBIT P17 TRUE COPY OF THE TABLE SHOWING THE PERCENTAGE OF PLAGIARISM TOGETHER WITH PLAGIARISM REPORTS OF THE PAPERS PUBLISHED BY THE RESPONDENTS 6 TO 8

EXHIBIT P18 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 1/4/2017 CORRECTED AS 1/5/2017 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P19 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18/7/2017

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT R1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE LIST SHOWING THE DETAILS OF THE CANDIDATES SHORTLISTED FOR INTERVIEW FOR MALAPPURAM CENTRE.

EXHIBIT R1(b) TRUE COPY OF THE LIST SHOWING THE DETAILS OF THE CANDIDATES SHORT LISTED FOR INTERVIEW FOR MURSHIDABAD CENTRE.

EXHIBIT R1(c) TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE GENERAL SELECTION COMMITTEE ALONG WITH STATEMENT OF MARKS FOR MALAPPURAM CENTRE.

EXHIBIT R1(d) TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE GENERAL SELECTION COMMITTEE ALONG WITH THE STATEMENT OF MARKS FOR MURSHIDABAD CENTRE.

EXHIBIT R1(e) TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DTD.16/09/16. W.P.(C) Nos.29113/2016 & 3949/2017 15

EXHIBIT R1(f) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE CPIO SELECTION COMMITTEE.

EXHIBIT R1(g) TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY SENT BY THE SELECTION COMMITTEE.

EXHIBIT R1(h) TRUE COPY OF THE SCREENING FORM.

EXHIBIT R1(i) TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE UGC REGULATION, 2010.

EXHIBIT R1(j) TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE MEMO OF THE UNIVERSITY.

EXHIBIT R1(k) TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE VICE CHANCELLOR DTD.5.9.16.

EXHIBIT R1(l) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.27/10/2016.

EXHIBIT R1(m) TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE.

EXHIBIT R1(n) TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE.

EXHIBIT-R6(a) TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF MASTERS DEGREE AWARDED TO 6TH RESPONDENT FROM AMITY UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW.

EXHIBIT-R6(b) TRUE COPY OF THE JRF/NET AWARD LETTER ISSUED TO 6TH RESPONDENT BY THE UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION.

EXHIBIT-R6(c) TRUE COPY OF THE RESUME OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT-R6(d) TRUE COPY OF PAGES 1 AND 2 OF MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS FOR APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS AND OTHER ACADEMIC STAFF IN UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES AND MEASURES FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF STANDARDS IN HIGHER EDUCATION)(2ND AMENDMENT), REGULATIONS, 2013.

EXHIBIT-R8(a) A TRUE COPY OF THE B-TECH DEGREE CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER DATED 12/6/2013.

EXHIBIT-R8(b) A TRUE COPY OF THE MBA DEGREE CERTIFICATE OF THIS RESPONDENT. W.P.(C) Nos.29113/2016 & 3949/2017 16

EXHIBIT-R8(c) A TRUE COPY OF THE NET QUALIFICATION CERTIFICATE DATED 20/5/2014 OF THIS RESPONDENT, ISSUED BY THE UGC GRAND COMMISSION.

True Copy

P.S to Judge smp W.P.(C) Nos.29113/2016 & 3949/2017 17

APPENDIX OF WP(C) No.3949/2017

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF NOTIFICATION DATED 16.12.2015.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE 2010 UGC REGULATIONS.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF APPENDIX - III OF 2010 UGC REGULATIONS.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 06.12.2016 SUBMITTED BY SRI. PREMARAJAN K, UNDER THE RTI ACT, 2005.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER D. NO. 13241/RM/SC DATED 13.12.2016 OBTAINED UNDER RTI ACT.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE MEMO DATED 01.06.2016.

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE GENERAL SELECTION COMMITTEE DATED 13.05.2016.

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT SHOWING THE API SCORE OF THE 28 CANDIDATES CALLED FOR INTERVIEW.

EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT SHOWING THE MARKS AWARDED TO THE CANDIDATES WHO ATTENDED THE INTERVIEW ON 13.05.2016, ON A SCALE OF 10.

EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE STATEMENT OF MARKS AND TABULATION SHEETS.

EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE NET CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE UGC.

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT-R3(a) TRUE COPY OF THE LIST SHOWING THE DETAILS OF THE CANDIDATES SHORT LISTED FOR INTERVIEW FOR MALAPPURAM CENTRE. W.P.(C) Nos.29113/2016 & 3949/2017 18

EXHIBIT-R3(b) TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE GENERAL SELECTION COMMITTEE ALONG WITH STATEMENT OF MARKS.

EXHIBIT-R3(c) TRUE COPY OF THE SCREENING FORM.

EXHIBIT-R3(d) TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE UGC REGULATION, 2010.

True Copy

P.S to Judge smp