JUDGMENT :

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J.

1. The petitioner impugns the actions of the Selection Committee constituted by the 1st respondent - Mahatma Gandhi University (“University” for short), in making selection to the post of Assistant Professor in Behavioral Sciences, primarily on the ground that the marks awarded to her by them are wholly in error since it has denied her the eligible ones for no tangible reason.

2. Sri.Raman Kartha - learned counsel for the petitioner, argued that his client has been awarded only 20.43 marks by the Selection Committee; while the 4th respondent has been awarded 36.5, thus manifesting a difference of 16 marks between them. He argued that the 4th respondent has been offered the appointment though, when their credentials are properly evaluated, his client would be entitled to a minimum of 23.84 marks additionally than what has been now granted, thus being found more meritorious and eligible for being appointed. He explained his case by saying that, his client has been denied marks under the heads ‘PhD’, ‘UGC Scholarship’ and ‘Teaching Experience’; while she has been awarded only two out of twelve marks for ‘Publications’. He asserted that, as per the judgme