Eligibility Decision — Systems/IT Profile (self-contained policy + candidate) Policy (Systems/IT roles): • BE in CS/IT/Electronics (or equivalent) with ≥ 60% (PG such as ME desirable but BE minimum still applies unless waived; not needed here). • Selection written ≥ 50% and interview ≥ 50%. • Relevant Systems/IT experience ≥ 5 years. • All met → Select; if experience ≥ 10 years with all minima → Refer to GM - Systems; any clear shortfall → Not to be selected; missing critical data → Information inadequate. Candidate: Ashok Malhotra — Born 19 March 1978; BE-IT 58%; ME-IT 72%; Systems Dept 11 years; Interview 56%; Written 45%. Determine the decision code.

Introduction / Context:
This case contains two potential blockers: a sub-60 BE score and a sub-50 written test. Even with an excellent ME and long tenure, independent minima must be respected unless a waiver is explicitly written.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Minima: BE ≥ 60%; Written ≥ 50%; Interview ≥ 50%; Experience ≥ 5 years.
• Candidate: BE 58% (fail); ME 72% (strong but does not waive BE minimum unless stated); Interview 56% (pass); Written 45% (fail); Experience 11 years (senior).

Concept / Approach:
Apply independent gates: any single fail implies ineligibility. Senior referral requires all minima to be satisfied; deficits block routing.

Step-by-Step Solution:
BE: 58% < 60% → Fail.Interview: 56% ≥ 50% → Pass.Written: 45% < 50% → Fail.Experience: 11 years → Senior, but referral precondition not met.Decision → Not to be selected.

Verification / Alternative check:
Even if a waiver allowed substituting ME for BE, the written-test failure alone is decisive; thus the final label remains negative.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
“Select” contradicts fails. “Refer to DGM/GM” requires meeting minima, which is not satisfied. Data are complete, so “information inadequate” does not apply.

Common Pitfalls:
Letting higher PG override required UG minima; ignoring separate written and interview cutoffs.

Final Answer:
if the candidate is not to be selected