Devan Ramachandran, J.

1. The essential challenge in this batch of writ petitions, being considered together, relate to the process of selection undertaken by the Cochin University of Science & Technology (CUSAT) to the posts of Assistant Professor (Life Science/Biotechnology with specialisation in Molecular Biology) and Assistant Professor (Life Science/Biotechnology with specialisation in Genetic Engineering).

2. Since all these cases involve essentially similar issues, reliefs sought therein being concatenated with each other and the nature of the pleadings and submissions being such that those in one would impact the others, it is only appropriate and idoneous that I consider all these cases together and dispose them jointly. However, for the sake of convenience I treat W.P. (C)No.23829/2015 as the lead case and any reference to parties and documents in this judgment, unless otherwise specifically mentioned, would be as is obtaining in the said writ petition.

3. I have heard the learned Senior Counsel Sri.N.N.Sugunapalan, assisted by Sri.S.Sujin, learned Senior Counsel Sri.K.Jaju Babu, assisted by Sri.Brijesh Mohan, Sri.P.C.Sasidharan, Sri.P.A.Aziz, Sri.John Joseph, appearing for the petitioners in the respective writ petitions, Sri.S.Krishnamoorthy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for CUSAT and University Grants Commission (UGC) and Sri.P. Sreekumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents in some of the writ petitions.

4. The constitutive point of controversy in all these cases is as to how the qualifications of the persons now included in the respective rank lists for the post of Assistant Professors as aforementioned have been reckoned and how they have been evaluated for the purpose of inclusion in the rank lists.

5. The petitioner in W.P.(C)No.23829/2015 is the second rank holder in the list prepared for the appointment to the post of Assistant Professor (Life Science/Biotechnology with specialisation in Molecular Biology) while the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.23406/2015 is ranked No.2 in the list published for appointment to the post of Assistant Professor (Life Science/Biotechnology with specialisation in Genetic Engineering). As regards the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.30140/2015 is concerned, she is rank No.7 in the list relating to Assistant Professor (Life Science/Biotechnology with specialisation in Molecular Biology) and Rank No.8 in the list relating to Assistant Professor (Life Science/Biotechnology with specialisation in Genetic Engineering). The petitioner in W.P.(C)No.36153/2015 claims that she had applied for both the posts but that she was not included in either of these lists after the final evaluation. She has, therefore, challenged the entire process as being illegal and unlawful.

6. Before answering the specific averments and issues contained in these writ petitions, one will have to understand how the evaluation and appointment process has been taken by the CUSAT.

7. The CUSAT issued Exhibit P1 notification dated 24.04.2013 calling for applications in the prescribed format from qualified persons to the post of Assistant Professors in various categories including those mentioned in this judgment. The qualifications were mandated to be as per the 'University Grants Commission 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' (UGC Minimum Qualifications Regulations, 2010), a copy of which has been marked as Exhibit P11. As per this Regulations, the minimum qualification required for recruitment and appointment of Assistant Professors in Universities/Colleges/Institutions is NET/SLET/SET. Clause 3.3.1 of the said Regulations, however, provide that candidates, who are or have been awarded a Ph.D. Degree in accordance with the UGC (Minimum Standards and Procedure for Award of Ph.D. Degree) Regulations, 2009 (UGC Ph.D. Regulations, 2009), shall be exempted fro