Eligibility Decision — HR/Personnel Profile (self-contained policy + candidate) Policy (HR/Personnel roles): • PG degree/diploma in HR/Personnel with ≥ 60%. • Graduation with ≥ 55%. • Selection process score ≥ 50% (explicit figure required). • Relevant HR/Personnel experience ≥ 5 years. • All met → Select; if experience ≥ 10 years with all minima met → Refer to Director-Personnel for senior approval; any clear shortfall → Not to be selected; missing critical figure(s) → Information inadequate. Candidate: Mohan Bajpai — Born 10 April 1975; Graduation 55%; PG Diploma (Personnel Management) 65%; HR Dept experience 6 years; Selection-process mark not stated. Determine the decision code.

Introduction / Context:
This “eligibility test” item checks whether you enforce a policy exactly as written, especially when a critical metric is missing. In HR screening puzzles, missing values are not to be guessed; they lead to a disciplined “information inadequate” outcome.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Thresholds: PG HR ≥ 60%; Graduation ≥ 55%; Selection ≥ 50% (must be stated); Experience ≥ 5 years.
• Decision mapping: all met → Select; any shortfall → Not to be selected; missing critical data → Information inadequate; ≥ 10 years with all minima → Refer to Director-Personnel.
• Candidate: Graduation 55% (meets); PG 65% (meets); Experience 6 years (meets); Selection score — not provided.

Concept / Approach:
Convert narrative to a checklist. A single missing mandatory field prevents a definitive decision. Do not infer or borrow values from context; stick to the explicit data.

Step-by-Step Solution:
PG HR: 65% ≥ 60% → Pass.Graduation: 55% ≥ 55% → Pass.Experience: 6 years ≥ 5 years → Pass.Selection score: Not stated → Missing critical figure.Decision mapping → Information inadequate.

Verification / Alternative check:
If the selection score were ≥ 50%, the outcome would be “to be selected” (no senior referral since experience < 10). If it were < 50%, the outcome would be “not to be selected.” Because it is not stated, neither branch is justified.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
“To be selected” or “not to be selected” presume a value we do not have. “Refer to Director-Personnel” requires ≥ 10 years experience and all minima met; tenure is only 6 years.

Common Pitfalls:
Inventing a number; treating “meets most” as sufficient; forgetting that equality at a cutoff (≥) is acceptable only when the figure is known.

Final Answer:
if the information provided is inadequat to take a decision