1. The rejection of the application submitted by the petitioner for appointment to the post of Professor in the Department of School of International Relations and Politics, by Ext.P3 communication issued by the University is under challenge in this writ petition.

2. The rejection is mainly for the reason that the petitioner does not have the required number of publications as per the U.G.C. norms. The notification issued by the University is produced as Ext.P1. Under the category of Professor, the eligibility for applying shown as item 2, reads as follows:

“2. An eminent scholar with published work of high quality, actively engaged in research with 10 years experience in Post Graduate teaching, and/experience in research at the University/National Level institutions, including experience of guiding research at doctoral level.

OR

An outstanding scholar with established reputation who has made significant contributions to knowledge.”

Condition No.1 under the General Conditions states as follows:

“The appointment against the above vacancies will be made as per UGC norms and reservation principles according to Mahatma Gandhi University Statutes and Regulations Kerala State & Subordinate Service Rules and Kerala Service Rules.”

Therefore, the applicant should be an eminent scholar with published work of high quality, apart from satisfying other conditions. The UGC norms have also been made applicable.

3. In the notification, under Category A – Professor, against serial No.2 – School of International Relations and Politics, the subject/specialization is shown as “Science Technology and International Relations/Intellectual Property Rights.”

4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the University.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the scrutiny committee has no power to reject the application. They can only place the matter before the selection committee and the ultimate decision will have to be taken by the selection committee after the selection process is completed. It is pointed out that the assumption made in Ext.P3 that the petitioner’s published works are not of high quality under the UGC norms, is also not correct. The petitioner’s specialization in the Doctoral work is International Relations with particular reference to Indo Soviet Relations in 1971-1980. The petitioner has two published works of high quality and she is engaged in research activity as approved Research Guide of M.G. University at Doctoral level. She has got 13 years of post graduate teaching experience as against 10 years required for submitting the application. Therefore, it is pointed out that she has satisfied all the prescriptions in Ext.P1 notification. What is projected in the argument is that the UGC norms have not prescribed any specified number as regards publications and the notification also does not stipulate any specified number of such publications. It is thus stated that the rejection of her application is totally arbitrary. It is also submitted that the post is reserved for Latin Catholic/Anglo Indian community. The petitioner belongs to Latin Catholic community and was the only candidate eligible. Therefore, the attempt is to deny appointment to her.

6. The University has filed a counter affidavit and an additional counter affidavit.

7. In para 7 of the counter affidavit, it is pointed out that the specialization prescribed for the post is “Science, Technology International Research/Intellectual property Rights.” The petitioner’s specialization in the doctoral work is international relations with particular reference to Indo Soviet Relations. In para 8 it is pointed out that the petitioner did not satisfy the requirement of specialization and the UGC stipulation regarding the quality of publication. She has two articles to her credit, but those were not in the referred journal. Those are not of the required standard and quality as contemplated in the notification. It is