SANDESH COLLEGE OF LAW

VIKHROLI, MUMBAI

TOPIC: PUBLIC OFFICER UNDER C.P.C.

PREPARED BY: GROUP IV

T.Y.LLB – SEM V

1
 Public Officer Under C.P.C

Meaning of C.P.C

 The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is a procedural law related to the administration of
civil proceedings in India.
 The Code is divided into two parts: the first part contains 158 sections and the second
part contains the First Schedule, which has 51 Orders and Rules.
 The sections provide provisions related to general principles of jurisdiction whereas
the Orders and Rules prescribe procedures and method that govern civil proceedings
in India.

History

 To give uniformity to Civil Procedure, Legislative Council of India, enacted Code of

Civil Procedure, 1858, which received the assent of Governor-General on 23 March
1859.
 The Code however, not applicable to Supreme Court in the Presidency Towns and to
the Presidency Small Cause Courts.
 But it did not meet the challenges and was replaced by Code of Civil Procedure Code,
1877.
 But still it did not fulfil the requirements of time and large amendments were
introduced. In 1882, the Code of Civil Procedure, 1882 was introduced.
 With passing of time it is felt that the Code needs some flexibility to breathe the air of
speed and effectiveness.
 To meet these problems Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was enacted.
 Though it has been amended number of time it stood the test of time.

Amendment

 The Code of Civil Procedure has been substantially amended in the year 2002. The
main purpose of the Amendment to the code was ensure speedy disposal of Civil
cases governed under the Act.
 CPC (Amendment)Act 2015
 Keeping in view the establishment of Commercial Court and the provisions thereof,
CPC (Amendment)Act,2016 has been enacted to amend certain provisions of the
CPC.
 These provisions are applicable to Commercial disputes of specified value.
 The act clarifies that the provisions of the CPC as amended by the Act would have an
overriding effect over any rules of the High Court or of the amendments made by the
State Government concerned.

2
Meaning of Public Officer under C.P.C

Public officer means a person falling under any of the following descriptions namely

1. every judge.
2. every member of an All-India service.
3. every commissioned or gazette officer in the military naval or air forces of the
union while serving under the government.
4. every officer of a court of justice whose duty it is as such officer to investigate or
report on any matter of law of fact or to make authenticate of report on any matter of
law or fact or to make authenticate or keep any document or to take charge of or
dispose of any property or to execute any judicial process or to administer any oath or
to interpret or to preserve an order on a court and every person especially authorized
by a court of justice to perform any of such duties.
5. every person who holds any office by virtue of which he is empowered to place or
keep any person in confinement;
6. every officer of the Government whose duty it is, as such officer, to prevent offences,
to give information of offences, to bring offenders to justice, or to protect the public
health, safety or convenience;
7. every officer whose duty it is, as such officer, to take, receive, keep or expend any
property on behalf of the Government, or to make any survey, assessment or contract
on behalf of the Government, or to execute any revenue process, or to investigate, or
to report on, any matter affecting the pecuniary interests of the Government, or to
make, authenticate or keep any document relating to the pecuniary interests of the
Government, or to prevent the infraction of any law for the protection of the
pecuniary interests of the Government; and
8. every officer in the service or pay of the Government, or remunerated by fees or
commission for the performance of any public duty;

Essentials

 A notice under Section 80 must contain

1. Name, description and place of residence of the person giving notice;
2. A statement of the cause of action; and
3. Relief claimed by him.
 In considering whether the essential requirements of the section have been complied
with, the court should ask the following questions:
1. Whether the name, description and residence of the plaintiff are given so as to
enable the authorities to identify the person giving the notice?
2. Whether the cause of action and the relief which the plaintiff claims have been
set out with sufficient particulars?
3. Whether such notice in writing has been delivered to or left at the office of the
appropriate authority mentioned in the section? And

3
 4. Whether the suit has been instituted after the expiration of two months after
notice has been served and the plaint contains a statement that such a notice
has been deliver of left?
 Statutory notice is not an empty formality. The object is to afford an opportunity to
the Government or a public officer to reconsider the matter in the light of the settled
legal position and take an appropriate decision in accordance with law. Such notice
has, however, become an empty formality. The administration is often unresponsive
and shows no courtesy even to intimate the aggrieved party why his claim is not
accepted.
 The provisions of Section 80 are express, explicit and mandatory and admit no
implications or exceptions. They are imperative in nature and must be strictly
complied with. They impose absolute and unqualified obligation on the court. No
court can entertain a suit unless the notice is duly served under sub-section (1) of
Section 80. If the section has done injustice, it is a matter which can be rectified by a
Legislature and not by a court.
 The provisions of Section 80 of the Code must be strictly complied with. But it cannot
be overlooked that it is a procedural provision, a machinery by which courts impart
justice A notice under this section, therefore, should not be construed in a pedantic
manner divorced from common sense.
 The question has to be decided by reading the notice as a whole in a reasonable
manner. If on such reading, the court is satisfied that the plaintiff has shown to have
given the necessary information which the statute requires him to give to the
defendants, inconsequential defect or error is immaterial and it will not vitiate the
notice. As observed by the Supreme Court, the provisions of the section are not
intended to be used as boobytraps against ignorant and illiterate persons.
 Sub-section (2) of Section 80 is inserted by the Code of Civil Procedure
(Amendment) Act, 1976 enables the plaintiff to institute a suit against the
Government or public officer for obtaining urgent or immediate relief with the leave
of the court even without serving notice to the Government or public officer. This
sub-section, thus, engrafts an exception to the rule laid down in sub-section (1) of
Section 80 and allows the plaintiff to obtain urgent relief in grave cases even without
issuing notice.

Other facts

 Due to widespread misuse and abuse by the Government and Public officers of this
section to dispose of litigation on grounds of technicalities, sub-section (3) to Section
was inserted by the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1976.
 It clarifies that not suit instituted against the Government or public officer shall be
dismissed merely on the ground of error or defect in the notice, if, in such notice, the
name, description and residence of plaintiff had been so given as to enable the
authority or public officer to identify the person serving the notice and such notice has
been delivered or left the officer of authority or public officer concerned.

4
Legal Duties of a Public Officer

 Act honestly, fairly and for the benefit of the association

 Duty to not misuse position or information
 Disclose and manage conflicts of interest
 Act with reasonable care, diligence and skill

Appointment of Public Officers

1. Subject to this Constitution, power to appoint persons to hold or act in any offices in
the public service (including power to confirm appointments), to exercise disciplinary
control over persons holding or acting such offices and to remove such persons from
office shall vest in the Public Service Commission.
2. (a) The Public Service Commission may, subject to such conditions as it thinks
fit, delegate any of its powers under this section by directions in writing to any
Commissioner of the Commission or to any public officer.
(b) The Public Service Commission may, subject to such conditions as it may
prescribe, delegate by directions in writing, its powers under this section to
enquire and report to it.
 In the case of any professional misconduct or negligence committed by
a public officer in the performance of his duties, to any appropriate
statutory disciplinary body;
 In the case of a public officer who has been seconded for duty or
transferred to a body corporate established by law for public purposes,
to that body corporate.
 This section shall not apply to
1. the office of Chief Justice or Senior Puisne Judge;
2. except for the purpose of making appointments thereto or to act
therein, the office of Director of Audit;
3. the office of Ombudsman;
4. any office, appointments to which are within the functions of the
Judicial and Legal Service Commission or the Disciplined Forces
Service Commission;
5. any office to which section 87 applies;
6. any ecclesiastical office;
7. any office of a temporary nature, the duties attaching to which are
mainly advisory and which Is to be filled by a person serving under a
contract on non pensionable terms.
 Before any appointment is made to the office of Secretary to the
Cabinet, of Financial Secretary, of a Permanent Secretary or of any
other supervising officer within the meaning of section 68, the Public
Service Commission shall consult the Prime Minister and no
appointment to the office of Secretary to the Cabinet, of Financial

5
 Secretary or of a Permanent Secretary shall be made unless the Prime
Minister concurs in it.
 Notwithstanding subsection (1) to (4), the power to transfer any
person holding any such office as is mentioned in subsection (4) to
any other such office, being an office carrying the same emoluments,
shall vest in the President, acting in accordance with the advice of the
Prime Minister.
 Before the Public Service Commission appoints to or to act in any
public office any person holding or acting in any office the power to
make appointments to which is vested in the Judicial and Legal Service
Commission or the Disciplined Forces Service Commission, the Public
Service Commission shall consult that Commission.
 Before making any appointment to any office on the staff of the
Ombudsman, the Public Service Commission shall consult the
Ombudsman.
 he Public Service Commission shall not exercise any of its powers in
relation to any office on the personal staff of the
 President, or in relation to any person holding or acting in any such
office, without the concurrence of the President, acting in his own
deliberate judgment.

Public Officer cannot give his post on the basis of inheritance

 It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that after the
commencement of Constitution of India, there cannot be any appointment on a public
post on the basis of inheritance.
 There ought to be a public advertisement and the concerned candidate must compete
with the other eligible candidates.

Liability of public officers for neglect of official duty

 The government enjoys sovereign immunities intort court cases. In addition, public
officials also enjoy immunities from certain cases. In combination, sovereign
immunity and immunities for public officers, provide for an avoidance of questions of
liability for the government.
 However, employees of the government may be found liable if they failed to act in
accordance with their duties as prescribed by their job description.
 For example, a police officer that fails to help a woman under duress, may be subject
to a tort case based on the job responsibilities of public officials.
 They would not be able to escape the case based on any of the types of immunities.
 There are immunities granted to public officials under Federal and State Statutes. For
example, Illinois enacted the "Local Governmental and Governmental Employees
Tort Immunity Act." Those types of laws prevent an abuse of actions against the
government or government officials.

6
 Immunities for public officials can be waived in cases where employees failed to
perform their expected duties. In addition, under very rare circumstances, the
government itself may waive immunity depending on the laws in that jurisdiction.
 Part of the reason that public officials enjoy immunities that directly result from their
employment, is to prevent lawsuits which would continuously disrupt the government
and services provided by the government. Tort lawsuits, which are frequently seen as
frivolous, often do not apply to any governmental agency or its employees.
 Members of Congress cannot be held liable for their actions as a member of Congress,
including the manner in which they vote. Those votes may, or may not directly effect
an individual but that individual cannot bring an action against that public official
because of immunities enjoyed by those individuals.
 Prosecutors, as public officials, enjoy certain and specific immunities. For example,
prosecutors cannot be held liable for their actions during a Grand Jury hearing. Yet,
they can be held liable for issues that arise as a result of their investigation of that
case.
 Public officials do receive certain immunities in regards to being liable. However, the
immunity is not absolute and it can be waived directly or indirectly. Immunities may
be waived if a public official acts in opposition of law, with the knowledge that they
are doing so.
 The law states that the public official must have been warned about the breach of law,
or must have had previous knowledge of the law, in order for the government to
waive any immunities. The immunities granted to public officials are not an explicit
right in cases where their conduct was obviously contradictory to the law or to public
safety.

Brief on Article 14 & Article 16 of Indian Constitution

Article 14 (Equality before law):

Abstract:
The purpose of this research is to identify the general principle of “right to equality” the
word “Right to equality” need no explanation because it tell its meaning itself. and it is one
the our fundamental right. But there are some hidden points which are needed to explain &
this research project highlights those points & exception, which are admissible by our Indian
constitution. It also helps to know why discrimination accepted under constitution law of
India?

The state not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws
within the territory of India. Protection and prohibition of discrimination on grounds of
religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth. Prof. Dicey, explaining the concept of legal
equality as it operated in England, said: “with us every official, from the prime minister down
to a constable or a collector of taxes, is under the same responsibility for every act done
without any legal justification as any other citizen.”

7
The phase “equality to the law “find a place in all written constitutions that guarantees
fundamental rights. “All citizens irrespective of birth, religion, sex, or race are equal before
law; that is to say, there shall not be any arbitrary discrimination between one citizen or class
of citizens and another.” “All citizens shall, as human persons he held equal before law.” “All
inhabitants of the republic are assured equality before the laws.”

Pantanjali Sastri, C.J., has expressed that the second expression is corollary of the first and it
is difficult to imaging a situation in which the violation of laws will not be the violation of
equality before laws thus, in substance the two expression mean one and same thing.

According to Dr. Jennings said that: “Equality before the law means that equality among
equals the law should be equal for all. And should be equally administered, that like should
treated alike. The right to sue and be sued, to prosecute and prosecuted for the same kind of
action should be same for all citizens of full age and understanding without distinctions of
race, religion, wealth, social status or political influence.”

Exceptions to Rule Of Law

In the case of Indra Sawhney the right to equality is also recognized as one of basic features
of Indian constitution. Article 14 applies to all person and is not limited to citizens. A
corporation, which is a juristic person, is also entailed to the benefit of this article. This
concept implied equality for equals and aims at striking down hostile discrimination or
oppression of inequality. In the case of Ramesh Prasad v. State of Bihar, AIR 1978 SC 327 It
is to be noted that aim of both the concept, ‘Equality before law’ and ‘Equal protection of the
law’ is the equal Justice.

Rule of Law

The rule of law embodied in Article 14 is the “Basic feature” of the Indian constitution.
Hence it cannot be destroyed even by an amendment of the constitution under article 368 of
the constitution.

New Concept of Equality for The Protection Of People Of India

In the case of the Air India v. Nargesh Meerza Regulation 46 of Indian Airlines regulations
provides an air Hostess will be retire from the service upon attaining the age of 35 years or
on marriage within 4 years of Service or on first pregnancy, whoever found earlier but
regulation 47 of the regulation act the managing director had the discretion extend the age of
retirement one year at a time beyond the age of retirement up to the age of 45 years at his
option if an air hostess was found medically fit it was held by the court that an air hostess on
the ground of pregnancy was unreasonable and arbitrary, it was the violation of article 14
under constitution law of India. The regulation did not restrict marriage after four years and
if an air hostess after having fulfilled the condition became pregnant, there was no ground
why first pregnancy should stand in the way of her running service. of the court said that the

8
termination of service on pregnancy was manifestly unreasonable and arbitrary on the basis
of this it was violation of article 14 of Indian constitution.

Conclusion

Keeping in view of above mentioned statements said by the different courts, it is clear that
Article 14 gives the ensurity of equal rights without discrimination. It says equal everyone is
Equal in eye of law. Whether he belongs to different race, religion, social status or wealth.

Permeation & Prohibition Of Article 14

Article 14 permits classification but prohibits class legislation the equal protection of law
guaranteed by article 14 does not mean that all laws must be general in character. It does not
mean that the same laws should apply to all persons. It does not mean that every law must
have universal application for, all person are not, by nature, attainment or circumstances in
the same position. The varying need of different classes of persons often require separate
treatment. From the very nature of society there should be different places and the legislature
controls the policy and enacts laws in the best interest of the safety and security of the state.
In fact, identical amount to unequal circumstances would amount to inequality. Thus, a
reasonable classification is permitted for the develop society. article is forbids is class-
legislation but it does not forbids reasonable classification. The classification, however, must
not be “Arbitrary, artificial or evasive” but must be based on some real and substantial
Distinction bearing a just and reasonable relation to the object sought be achieved by the
legislation.Article 14 implied where equals are treated differently without any reasonable
basis. But where equals and unequal are treated differently, article 14 does not apply class
legislation is that which makes an improper discrimination by conferring particular privileges
upon a class of persons arbitrarily selected from a large number of persons, all of whom stand
in the same relation to the privilege granted that between whom and the persons, not so
favored no reasonable distinction or substantial difference can be found justifying the
inclusion of one and the exclusion of the other from such privilege.

Special provision for women and Children and SC, ST & backward classes:

Article 14 of Indian constitution law says that all are equal in the eye of law. No one can
prevent the state from making any special provisions for women and children. For a
examples, special seating arrangement for women in buses, trains, metros trains is not
unconstitutional. It was held by court that “reservation of some seats for women in college.”

Article 15
Article 15 (1) and (2) prohibit the state from discriminating any citizen on ground of any
religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.

9
These articles provide that there shall be no restriction on any person on any of the above
bases to access and use the public places such as shops, restaurants, hotels, places of public
entertainment etc. or use of wells, tanks, bathing ghats, roads and places of public resort
maintained wholly or partly out of State funds or dedicated to the use of the general public.

From article 15(3) onwards, the constitution starts protective discrimination. Article 15(3)
empowers the state to make special provisions for women and children. Article 15(4)
empowers the state to make special provisions for advancement of socially and educationally
backwards or SC/STs. Article 15(5) goes one step further and empowers the state to make
reservation in admission into education institutions including private schools or colleges
whether or not aided by government. Only minority educational institutions (such as
Madarsas) have been left out of this provision. Thus, article 15(3) and 15(4) are foundational
bricks of reservation in the country.

Article 16:

Equality of opportunity in matters of public employment.-

INTRODUCTION

Right to Equality is one of the basic fundamental rights that the constitution of India
guarantees to all the citizens of the country. Article 16 deals with the equality of opportunity
in matters of public employment. Equal opportunity is a term which has differing definitions
and there is no consensus as to the precise meaning. The constitution of India has given a
wide interpretation to this article. Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) principles apply to:

 Access to jobs
 Conditions of employment
 Relationships in the workplace
 The evaluation of performance and
 The opportunity for training and career development. [i]

“Article 16 is an instance of the application of the general rule with special reference to
opportunity of appointments under the State. It says that there shall be equality of
opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office
under the State. If it stood alone all the backward communities would go to the wall in a
society of uneven basic social structure; the said rule of equality would remain only an
utopian conception unless a practical content was given to it… that is why the makers of the
Constitution introduced clause (4) in Art. 16. The expression “nothing in this article” is a
legislative device to express its intention in a most emphatic way that the power conferred
thereunder is not limited in an what by the main provision but falls outside it. It has not really
carved out an exception but has preserved a power untrammelled by the other provisions of
the Article.[ii]

10
What Article 16 guarantees is equality of opportunity in matters of appointment in State
services. Equality of opportunity connotes that every citizen shall be eligible for employment
or appointment to any office under the State according to his qualifications and capability, as
held in by the Supreme Court in State of J. & K. v. K.V.N.T. Kholo[iii], AIR 1974 S.C.
Article 16 therefore does not prevent the State from prescribing the necessary qualifications
and selective tests for recruitment of government services.

In K.C. Vasanth Kumar v. State of Karnataka[vii], AIR 1985 S.C. 1495, the Supreme Court
has suggested that the reservations in favor of backward classes must be based on mean test.
It has been further suggested that the policy of reservations should be reviewed every five
years or so and if a class has reached up to that level where it does not need reservation. Its
name should be deleted from the list of backward classes.

Supreme Court in Indira Sawhney & OR’s v. Union of India[viii]AIR 1993 SC 477

1. Upheld Implementation of separate reservation for other backward classes in central

government jobs.
2. Ordered to exclude Creamy layer of other backward classes from enjoying reservation
facilities.
3. Ordered to restrict reservations within 50% limit.
4. Declared separate reservations for economically poor among forward castes as
invalid.
5. The scope of Article 16 (4) was considered by the Supreme Court in Devadasan v.
Union of India[x], AIR 1964 S.C. 179. In this case “carry forward rule” made by the
Government to regulate appointment of persons of backward classes in government
services was involved.
6. The Supreme Court struck down the “carry forward rule” as unconstitutional on the
ground that the power vested in the government cannot be so exercised so as to deny
reasonable equality of opportunity in matters of public employment for the members
of classes other than backward classes. In this case reservation of posts to the
members of backward classes had exceeded 50% and had gone up to 68% due to
“carry forward rule.”
7. The Supreme Court held that each year of recruitment must be considered by itself
and the reservation for each year should not be excessive so as to create monopoly or
Interfere unduly with the legitimate claims of the rest of the society. So the court held
that reservation should be less than 50%, but how much less than 50% should depend
upon the prevailing situations.[xi]S. Rly. v. Rangachari[xii]AIR 1962 SC 36, State of
Punjab v. Hiralal[xiii] 1970(3) SCC 567, Akhil Bharatiya Soshit Karamchari Sangh
(Railway) v. Union of India[xiv](1981) 1 SCC 246 Reservation of appointments or
posts under Article 16(4) included promotions.

In shedding light on the true content of equality of opportunity, Bernard Williams adds: “It
requires not merely that there should be no exclusion from access on grounds other than those
appropriate or rational for the good in question, but that the grounds considered appropriate

11
for the good should themselves be such that people from all sections of society have an equal
chance of satisfying them.” In defining a “section of society”, we cannot include sections of
the population identified just by the characteristics which figure in the grounds for allocating
the good since it will further exclude some section of the population. Everyone will agree that
for getting admissions in a medical college – where seats are limited – merit is an appropriate
criterion. Now, exclusion of potential candidates on grounds other than merit is prima facie
denial of equality of opportunity.[xx]

CONCLUSION:

The slogan “equality of opportunity” commands wide allegiance among the members of
contemporary societies. Under scrutiny, equality of opportunity divides into several different
ideals, some of them being opposed rivals. It is controversial which of these ideals, if any, are
morally acceptable, and which, if any, should be coercively enforced The ideal of a society in
which people do not suffer disadvantage from discrimination on grounds of supposed race,
ethnicity, religion, sex, sexual orientation is widely upheld as desirable in itself. For many,
the ideal is more compelling than any argument that might be offered to support it as
requirements of justice.

12
 Case Reference - Nandan Lohra v/s State of Jharkhand

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (S) No. 2072 of 2007
WITH I.A. No.2023 of 2007

Nandan Lohra ….. Petitioner

Versus

The State of Jharkhand and others ….. Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D. N. PATEL

For the Petitioner: Mr. Jageshwar Mahto

For the Respondents: J.C. To Sr. S.C.II th 05/Dated: 17 November, 2011

Petitioner:

Notice to defendant

The present petition has been preferred by the petitioner for getting the post of
Chaukidar in the Village Raghunathpur, P.S. Chanho, District Ranchi.

Arguments by the petitioner:

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner's name has been
recommended by the entire villagers for his appointment as Chaukidar of village
Raghunathpur.

Moreover, the father of the petitioner was also Chaukidar and thereafter he has retired
and he has also filed application that the petitioner may be appointed as chaukidar.

Counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the son of second wife of petitioner's
father has been appointed as Chaukidar which is illegal and petitioner should have been
appointed as Chaukidar on the basis of the Bihar Chaukidar Manual.

Defendant:

Arguments by defendant

Counsel for the respondents State submitted that the petitioner's character is not good
as per the report which is annexed as Annexure B to the counter affidavit filed by the
respondents dated 24th April, 2008.

13
It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that after the
commencement of Constitution of India, there cannot be any appointment on a public
post on the basis of inheritance.

There ought to be a public advertisement and the concerned candidate must compete
with the other eligible candidates.

Judgement:

Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances
of the case, I see no reason to entertain this writ petition mainly for the fact that there is no
legitimate right vested with the petitioner to be appointed as chaukidar of village
Raghunathpur, P.S. Chanho, District Ranchi. Moreover, the grounds stated in the petition
that the entire villagers have requested that petitioner should be appointed, cannot be a
reason for appointment of the petitioner as a Chaukidar.

In view of these facts, there is no case made out by the petitioner to be appointed as
Chaukidar. Moreover, after the commencement of the Constitution of India in force and
specifically as per the Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution of India, public post cannot
be given to the legal heir of the retired employee. There ought to be a public advertisement
and equal opportunity should have been given to the eligible candidates.

In view of this fact also, merely because petitioner is the son of a retired Chaukidar, he
cannot be appointed merely because he is his legal heir. State authorities should take care of
the matter that after commencement of the Constitution of India, no public post can be given
as an inheritance to the son/daughter of a retired employee. There ought to be a public
advertisement and candidates must be selected on the basis of their merits.

I, therefore, direct the respondents State Authorities that henceforth, no appointment shall be
made without public advertisement on the post of Chaukidar. The provision ought to be
applied in the light of the constitutional provisions and there ought to be a public
advertisement and equal opportunity should have been given to all the eligible candidates.

Hence, there is no substance in the writ petition which is hereby dismissed.

I.A. I disposed of in view of final order passed in Writ Petition.

14
REFERENCES:

1. Research materials provided by the professors and staff.

2. Internet sources

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We sincerely thank our college Principal, Teachers and staff for extending their kind support
and assistance in undertaking this valuable and learning research work.

We further take this opportunity to thank each and every member of this group (IV) for doing
a great job, contributing your talents and skills to the team.

15