How may I calculate Research Contribution as Per UGC rules? The University Grants Commission (U.G.C) is the autonomous and statutory body in India responsible for governing the rules and regulations of the universities and various other academic institutions
that come under its purview.

The rule for appointment of teachers in the important academic institutes of India is governed by its rule, "UGC Regulations on Minimum Qualifications for Appointment of Teachers and Other Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and Measures for the Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education 2010".
It is generally taken as the order of the day.

In this regulation, there is a provision for calculating the points for research papers, research contributions etc. I tried to go through them, but feeling slightly ambiguous. It is given generally in Appendix III. 

My question is in the tables given against each item maximum score is given. 
But how should we take the count of each item. I tried to go through the same but did not find anything.

What is the value of each item and how does it contribute to the maximum score as given in the tables in the aforementioned report.
I was able to download the paper using the link provided, and thus the link is functional.

I have looked at Appendix III briefly, and will offer my interpretation. However, I am not Indian and have no experience in India, so my interpretation is strictly based on what I have read and my background (US, academic + industry, where we do not use such explicit scoring systems).

My interpretation is that the maximum number of points would be awarded if the requirements for each item are fully met.  E.g. if you publish a research paper in one of the specified refereed journals, you get 15 points for that publication, regardless of the number of citations that paper gets or the ranking/reputation of the journal, or even your own opinion of the quality of that paper.  Though it is not stated in Appendix III, I would interpret "max points" as meaning that a lower score might be awarded if the criteria is only partially met.  For example, if you published an essay or commentary in a journal rather than a full research paper, you might award yourself 4 points or 7 points rather than the full 15.  (E.g. I had a letter published in PNAS critiquing a published article.  It went through a review process, but at 500 words would hardly qualify as an "article". So maybe it's worth 1 point in this category.)

In part I base my interpretation at the fine granularity of the scoring system and the many explicit rules and criteria that go along with each item.  I also base my interpretation on the lack of any mention of "quality" or "impact" or "significance" in the criteria.



What my interpretation leaves out is the cultural norms, both across Indian colleges and universities, and also by regions, fields/disciplines, etc.  What ever the official and explicit rules of any scoring system, there are always unofficial and tacit norms as to how they are executed and interpreted.