ERP·UNIDegree-awarding operations

University ERP

You set the paper. You award the degree.

The university edition: affiliation and college governance, confidential paper setting with coding and decoding, result processing under separation of duties, convocation and degree issuance verifiable decades later, research and PhD administration, and the statutory reporting a university carries — assembled from live records rather than reconstructed.

Request a working demoJump to the module ledger
SpecificationERP·UNI
Edition of
Education ERP
Added modules
7 beyond the core spine
Scope
Unitary, affiliating, or multi-campus
Examination
Owned end to end, under separation of duties
Credentials
Degrees and transcripts, verifiable long-term
Statutory
UGC · AICTE · AISHE · NAAC · NIRF · ABC

Built for

  • State and central universities
  • Private and deemed universities
  • Affiliating universities governing colleges
  • Autonomous colleges awarding their own results
  • Multi-campus university systems

§ 01

The consequences are permanent

Everything a university does downstream of teaching produces a record that has to survive for decades and be defensible against challenge. A degree issued in 2026 will be verified by an employer in 2046, possibly after the department that issued it has been reorganised twice. A result declared on a moderation policy will be litigated by a student who believes the policy was applied inconsistently. A paper that leaks is not an incident; it is a re-examination, a police complaint, and a year of reputational damage.

That changes what the software has to be. In a school ERP, an audit log is good hygiene. In a university system it is the primary artefact: who could see the question paper before the examination, who decoded which dummy numbers to which candidates, who moderated a subject and under what authority, who reprinted a degree and why. Those questions have to be answerable years later by someone who was not there.

The second problem is governance at distance. An affiliating university does not run its colleges' classrooms, but it is accountable for their examinations, their eligibility determinations, and their aggregate reporting. It needs the colleges to submit in a fixed shape, on a fixed clock, with the errors caught before they enter the result ledger rather than after a result is declared.

§ 02

What this edition adds

On top of the twelve-module core spine — registry, admissions, fees, attendance, timetable, examinations, communication, transport, hostel, library, inventory, and accounts.

01

Affiliation & college governance

The register of institutions the university governs, what each is permitted to run, and how that permission is granted, inspected, and withdrawn.

  • College register with programmes, sanctioned intake, and affiliation status
  • Affiliation application, inspection scheduling, and committee report workflow
  • Continuation, extension, and withdrawal with the decision trail retained
  • Faculty-ratio and infrastructure compliance checks against sanctioned intake
  • Per-college portal for submissions with role-scoped access
  • Circulars and regulation changes published with acknowledgement tracked
02

Confidential examination section

The highest-control area in the system. Paper setting, moderation, printing, and distribution under separation of duties, with every access recorded.

  • Paper setter and moderator appointment with conflict-of-interest declaration
  • Question paper submission through an encrypted channel, never email
  • Setter identity separated from paper identity throughout
  • Multiple sets per subject with random release at examination time
  • Printing and packet dispatch tracked to the centre and the slot
  • Time-boxed access windows — nobody holds standing access to live papers
  • Complete access log: who opened what, from where, and when
03

Result processing & moderation

Coding, evaluation, decoding, moderation, and declaration — each a distinct duty held by a distinct role, because that separation is the control.

  • Dummy-number coding with the mapping sealed until decoding
  • Evaluator allotment, batch tracking, and per-script evaluation records
  • On-screen marking with double valuation and a third-valuation rule
  • Decoding as an authorised event, logged with quorum where required
  • Moderation, grace, and condonation applied by policy with the trail kept
  • Result committee approval before declaration, recorded as a decision
  • Revaluation, rechecking, and challenge-valuation cycles tracked to closure
  • Result withheld and unfair-means cases handled as their own workflow
04

Degrees, transcripts & long-term verification

The credential is the university's product. It has to be issuable, reissuable, and verifiable long after everyone involved has moved on.

  • Convocation lists generated from the final result ledger
  • Degree, provisional, migration, and consolidated marksheet issuance
  • Transcript generation in the format a receiving institution accepts
  • Serial numbering with a non-editable issue register
  • Duplicate issuance with reason, approval, and cross-reference to the original
  • Public verification endpoint per credential, and QR on the document
  • DigiLocker issuance and Academic Bank of Credits deposit
05

Research & PhD administration

A separate lifecycle from coursework, with its own committees, deadlines, and evidentiary requirements.

  • Entrance, interview, and provisional registration workflow
  • Supervisor allocation with vacancy and ratio limits enforced
  • Doctoral committee constitution, meetings, and progress reports
  • Coursework completion, comprehensive examination, and synopsis approval
  • Thesis submission with plagiarism check and examiner panel appointment
  • Viva scheduling, evaluation reports, and award recommendation
  • Fellowship, contingency, and project-grant records
06

Statutory & ranking reporting

A university reports to more bodies than any other kind of institution. Held live, each return becomes a review rather than a project.

  • AISHE return assembled across the university and its colleges
  • NAAC AQAR criterion data with the evidence repository attached
  • NIRF data preparation across teaching, research, and outcomes
  • UGC and AICTE programme, intake, and faculty-ratio returns
  • Statutory-body records — Academic Council, Executive Council, Court
  • RTI response pack assembled from the record rather than by hand
  • Variance checks against the previous filing before submission
07

Academic regulation & governance

The rules themselves, versioned — because a student is assessed under the regulation in force when they enrolled, not the current one.

  • Regulation versions with effective dates and applicable cohorts
  • Ordinance and statute repository with amendment history
  • Programme and syllabus approval through Board of Studies and Academic Council
  • Grading, moderation, and promotion rules bound to a regulation version
  • Equivalence and credit-transfer decisions recorded as precedent
  • Committee meetings, agendas, minutes, and action tracking

§ 03

An examination cycle, end to end

Read this as a chain of custody rather than a process diagram — each step hands control to a different role and records the handover.

  1. 01

    Notification

    Examination notified, colleges open forms, eligibility criteria and the applicable regulation version published to every affiliated institution.

  2. 02

    Eligibility & forms

    Colleges submit candidate lists with attendance and internal assessment. Validation rejects errors at submission rather than after the result ledger is built.

  3. 03

    Paper setting

    Setters and moderators appointed with conflicts declared, papers submitted through the encrypted channel, setter identity kept separate from paper identity.

  4. 04

    Conduct

    Centres allotted, seating and hall tickets issued, a set released at examination time, attendance and unfair-means cases recorded at the centre.

  5. 05

    Evaluation

    Scripts coded to dummy numbers, allotted to evaluators in batches, marked on screen with double valuation and a third-valuation rule where marks diverge.

  6. 06

    Decoding & moderation

    Decoding performed as an authorised, logged event; moderation and grace applied by the regulation in force for that cohort, with the trail retained.

  7. 07

    Declaration

    Result committee approves, results declare to students and colleges together, and the ledger locks. Withheld cases move to their own workflow.

  8. 08

    Post-result

    Revaluation and challenge valuation run to closure, credits deposit to ABC, marksheets issue to DigiLocker, and convocation lists build from the final ledger.

§ 04

Who sees what

Separation of duties is not a permissions convenience here — it is the control that makes the examination defensible. No role below can complete a cycle alone.

Who sees what
RoleCan seeCan do
Controller of ExaminationsThe full cycle status; paper metadata but not paper content outside an authorised windowAppoint setters and moderators, authorise decoding, publish results after committee approval
Paper setterOnly their own assigned subject, only within the submission windowSubmit the paper through the encrypted channel; no visibility of candidates or any other paper
EvaluatorAllotted scripts by dummy number only — never a candidate identityEnter marks against the scheme; cannot see the decoding map or another evaluator's marks
Coding / decoding officerThe mapping, only during the authorised event, with quorum where the regulation requires itPerform coding and decoding as logged events; cannot enter or alter marks
Result committeeAggregate result analysis, moderation proposals, and the audit trail behind themApprove moderation policy application and authorise declaration
Affiliated collegeOnly its own candidates, submissions, results, and affiliation statusSubmit eligibility, internal assessment, and exam forms; download results and hall tickets
Registrar's officeCredentials issued, the issue register, verification requests, statutory recordsIssue degrees and transcripts, approve duplicates with reason, respond to verifications
StudentOwn result, marksheet, credits, and issued credentialsFill forms, pay fees, apply for revaluation, request transcripts and duplicates

§ 05

Records that outlive the system

Retention here is measured in decades, and some of it is permanent. Each class below has its own retention rule and its own access regime.

Result ledger
Permanent — the authoritative record behind every credential
Credential register
Permanent — serial, issue, reissue, and revocation history
Examination audit
Access, coding, decoding, moderation, and declaration events
Regulation versions
Permanent, with the cohort each version governs
Committee decisions
Agendas, minutes, and resolutions with action closure
Research records
Registration, committees, thesis, examiners, and award
Affiliation history
Grants, inspections, conditions, extensions, and withdrawals
Unfair means
Case, evidence, hearing, decision, and sanction period

§ 06

What it connects to

A university's integration surface is mostly outward — to national platforms, to its colleges, and to whoever verifies its credentials.

National platforms

  • Academic Bank of Credits deposit against APAAR
  • DigiLocker issuance of degrees, marksheets, and transcripts
  • AISHE data submission
  • NIRF data preparation
  • National Scholarship Portal verification

Regulators & bodies

  • UGC programme and compliance returns
  • AICTE approval and intake records
  • NAAC AQAR and evidence repository
  • State higher-education department reporting

Examination systems

  • On-screen marking and script scanning
  • OMR scanning for objective components
  • Secure paper distribution to examination centres
  • Anti-plagiarism services for theses and projects

Colleges & campus

  • Affiliated-college portal for eligibility and IA submission
  • College ERP direct integration where the college runs one
  • Identity federation across campuses and colleges
  • Payment gateways for examination and credential fees

§ 07

Ground it stands on

A university's software obligations begin with the UGC and AICTE regulations governing its programmes, intake, and faculty ratios, and extend through NAAC assessment, the AISHE return, and NIRF where it participates. Those are the visible layer. The consequential layer is evidentiary: the examination process must be reconstructable years later to a standard that survives a writ petition, and the credential register must remain authoritative long after the systems that produced it have been replaced.

The National Education Policy 2020 added obligations that are now operational rather than aspirational — the Academic Bank of Credits requires credits to be deposited against a student's APAAR identity as they are earned, and multiple-entry and multiple-exit pathways require the regulation version governing a cohort to be tracked explicitly rather than assumed.

The Right to Information Act deserves specific mention because universities receive a high volume of requests about examination process, evaluation, and appointments. A system that can assemble a response from the record — rather than from a search of people's inboxes — converts a recurring institutional burden into a query.

Implemented against

  • UGC and AICTE regulations on programmes, intake, and faculty ratios
  • Separation of duties across setting, evaluation, decoding, and declaration
  • Complete, immutable examination access log retained for the statutory period
  • Regulation versioning, with each cohort assessed under the version in force at enrolment
  • ABC credit deposit against APAAR, and DigiLocker credential issuance
  • AISHE, NAAC AQAR, and NIRF data assembled from live records
  • Permanent credential register with reissue and revocation history
  • RTI response assembly from the record, with exemption handling
  • DPDP Act 2023 — consent, purpose limitation, and retention actually executed

§ 08

What it replaces

Compared against the arrangement most universities run: a legacy examination system, several departmental databases, and a great deal of institutional memory.

What it replaces
AspectLegacy exam system & institutional memoryThis edition
Paper custodyEmail, a courier, and trustEncrypted submission with time-boxed access and a complete log
DecodingA procedure people rememberAn authorised, quorate, logged event
ModerationApplied by the committee, documented afterwardsApplied by the regulation version, with the trail written as it happens
College submissionsFiles by email, errors found after the ledger is builtValidated at submission, in a portal, against the deadline
Degree verificationA letter to the registrar and a two-week waitA public endpoint and a QR on the document
Duplicate degreesIssued and hoped to be traceableApproved with reason, cross-referenced to the original, in the register
AQAR and AISHEA project every yearA review of data already held
RTI on examinationA search of people's inboxesAssembled from the record with exemptions applied

§ 09

Rollout

The confidential examination section goes live last, never first — it is the module where a partial rollout does real damage, and it needs the registry and the college portal already trusted.

  1. 01Month 1

    Registry, colleges & regulations

    • Student, staff, college, and programme registers migrated
    • Regulation versions loaded with their effective dates and cohorts
    • Affiliated-college portal opened with role scopes per institution
    • Data-quality report issued before anything goes live
  2. 02Month 2–3

    Forms, fees & submissions

    • Examination notification, form filling, and fee collection live
    • College eligibility and internal-assessment submission with validation
    • Hall tickets, centre allotment, and seating for one cycle
    • Old result ledgers imported and reconciled for verification queries
  3. 03Month 4–5

    Evaluation & result processing

    • Coding, evaluator allotment, and on-screen marking rehearsed on a past cycle
    • Decoding, moderation, and declaration run in parallel with the existing process
    • Result analysis and revaluation workflows validated against last year's outcome
    • Separation-of-duties roles assigned and tested by internal audit
  4. 04Month 6+

    Confidential section, credentials & reporting

    • Paper setting and confidential distribution switched on for a full cycle
    • Convocation, degree issuance, and public verification live
    • ABC deposit and DigiLocker issuance connected
    • AISHE, AQAR, and NIRF assembled and checked against the last filing

Talk to an engineer

Bring one past examination cycle.

We will run coding, evaluation, decoding, and moderation against it in parallel, and you can audit the trail it produces. Reply within one business day.

  • Your data stays yours — NDA on request before anything is shared
  • A working demonstration, not a slide deck
  • Written scope and an honest timeline before any commitment

We reply within one business day.

We use these details only to respond to your enquiry. See our privacy policy.

§ FAQ

Questions we are actually asked

How is this different from your University Management System service?

The service builds to your regulations from a blank page, which is the right answer for a university whose ordinances differ substantially from the norm or which is replacing a deeply embedded legacy system on its own terms. This is a platform that already implements the processes described above; you configure regulations, formats, and roles, and we extend where your ordinances differ. Universities with unusual examination architectures usually still need the build — we will tell you which you are during scoping rather than after.

How is question paper confidentiality actually enforced?

Through separation of duties and time-boxed access rather than a password. Setter identity is kept separate from paper identity throughout. Papers are submitted through an encrypted channel, never email. Nobody — including the Controller — holds standing access to live paper content; access is granted for a window, for a purpose, and every open is logged with actor, time, and origin. Multiple sets per subject are held and one is released at examination time. None of this makes a leak impossible; it makes an undetected leak very difficult, which is the achievable goal.

We are an affiliating university with over a hundred colleges. Can they submit into this?

That is the design case. Each college gets a scoped portal for eligibility, internal assessment, exam forms, and result download, seeing only its own candidates. Submissions are validated at the point of upload — the errors that currently surface after the result ledger is built are rejected before they enter it. Colleges already running our College ERP integrate directly instead of uploading files.

A student enrolled under an older regulation. Is that handled?

Yes, and it is one of the things worth testing every vendor on. Regulations are versioned with effective dates and the cohorts they govern, and grading, moderation, and promotion rules are bound to a version rather than to the system's current configuration. A 2023-cohort student is assessed under the 2023 regulation even when the 2026 regulation is in force for everyone else.

Can it verify a degree issued before the system existed?

If the historical result ledgers are imported, yes — and importing them is part of phase two for exactly this reason. Verification requests overwhelmingly concern graduates from before any new system was installed, so a verification endpoint that only covers students admitted after go-live answers almost none of the traffic it exists to handle.

Does it support on-screen marking and double valuation?

Yes. Scripts are scanned and coded to dummy numbers, allotted to evaluators in batches, and marked on screen. Double valuation is standard, with a third-valuation rule triggered by a mark divergence you configure. No evaluator sees a candidate identity, another evaluator's marks, or the decoding map.

Who can run the system day to day — do we need our own IT team?

You need someone who owns the data and someone who owns the examination configuration; both are normally existing roles. Infrastructure can run in your own tenancy with your IT team holding the keys, or in ours. What we would not recommend is a deployment where nobody inside the university owns the regulation configuration — that is the single reliable predictor of a system drifting away from the ordinances it is supposed to enforce.

Primary sources

Elsewhere in the suite