procedure adopted by the respondent University is illegal. Further, it is submitted that the UGC Regulations require that prior to the Selection, the University has to evaluate the research papers by the experts with the assessment report and marks awarded in case of CAS promotions. The petitioner would state that he was surprised to find when he attended the interview that candidates who have been called, have secured less than 400 points as API score, which revealed that no evaluation was done by the subject experts and the selection process is contrary to the UGC Regulations, which is mandatory. It is further submitted that the manner of evaluation for direct recruitment to the post of Professor, has not been adhered to and the minimum 400 points API requirement has been given a goby. By relying upon the counter affidavit filed by the the fourth respondent stating that in his self appraisal, he has stated that he had 160 points and was not confident of not being called for interview, but he was called for interview, which would go to show that there has been no evaluation. It is further submitted that the selection committee in utter disregard to the UGC Regulations has awarded marks to all candidates and several of the applicants including the fourth respondent do not have the minimum requirement and therefore, ineligible to be considered for appointment to the post of Professor. It is further submitted that the petitioner has also submitted a representation before the Vice Chancellor and there was no response to the representation and therefore, he has approached this Court by way of this Writ Petition for the aforementioned relief.
