Eligibility Decision — Systems/IT Profile (self-contained policy + candidate) Policy (Systems/IT roles): • BE in CS/IT/Electronics (or equivalent) with ≥ 60% (PG does not waive BE unless stated). • 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: Navin Prakash — Born 4 April 1974; BE (Computer Science) 62%; Systems Dept since July 1999; Interview 55%; Written 45%. Determine the decision code.

Introduction / Context:Even when academic credentials and tenure are strong, selection-stage minimums are hard gates. This profile demonstrates a written-test deficiency that cannot be offset by other strengths.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Minima: BE ≥ 60%; Written ≥ 50%; Interview ≥ 50%; Experience ≥ 5 years.
• Candidate: BE 62% (pass); Interview 55% (pass); Written 45% (fail); Experience ≫ 5 years (since 1999).

Concept / Approach:Apply independent minima: failure in any one criterion implies “not to be selected.” Senior referral to GM-Systems is only available after satisfying all minima.

Step-by-Step Solution:Degree: 62% → Pass.Interview: 55% → Pass.Written: 45% < 50% → Fail.Experience: Very high → Irrelevant once a gate fails.Decision → Not to be selected.

Verification / Alternative check:Even if a policy had senior routing, routing presupposes minimums are met. Here, they are not.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:“To be selected” contradicts the fail. “Refer to DGM/GM” requires meeting all minima, which is not the case.

Common Pitfalls:Assuming long experience overrides a failed gate; it does not in a minima-driven process.

Final Answer:if the candidate is not to be selected