9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 541X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fit in the interest of justice." 2. It is the case of the petitioner and also contended by Mr. Puneet Singh Bindra, learned counsel for the petitioner that in 2010, after completing the intermediate stage of Cost & Management Accountancy (for short „CMA‟) Course, the petitioner registered with the respondent No.2 as a final year student of the CMA Course under old syllabus of 2008, and was allotted a registration number. In the month of December of 2011, the petitioner appeared in the final year examination conducted by the Institute and scored more than 60% marks in the Business Valuation paper of Group IV but could not clear the other papers in the same group being; (i) Management Accounting & Enterprise Performance Management, (2) Advance Financial Accounting and Reporting; (3) Cost Audit and Operational Audit. 3. According to Mr. Bindra, as per Regulation 41(2) of the ICAI Regulations of the Institute, the petitioner was granted an exemption from appearing in the Business Valuation paper in the subsequent exams/attempts. The said Regulation grants exemption to those students, who score more than 60% marks in a given paper from appearing in that paper again in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2012. It is his case that the final stand of the respondent is that the Amendment shall also be applicable in the case of the petitioner. He seeks, the reliefs prayed for in the petition. 6. On the other hand, Mr. G.S. Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the respondent would submit that the ICAI is a specialized statutory body and has full power and discretion to make Rules for better management of the affairs and functions of the Council. One such function is to ensure that the standard of students and the quality of candidates in at par with international standards. The legislature has empowered the Respondent with discretionary powers to make rules and implement them in order to achieve its objectives. In particular, Regulation 35(3) empowers the council to provide guidelines viz exemption. Further, to ensure a smooth transition after the amendments, Regulation 41(3A) empowers the Respondent to effectuate and/or delay implementation of the Amendment. He would state, that the petitioner, contrary to his pleadings, had full knowledge of the Amendment to Regulation 41(2). In this regard, he would draw the attention of this Court to the terms and conditions printed on the Admit Card as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tandard and conduct of examinations. It is submitted that the amendment carried out in Regulation 41(2) is for the purpose of maintaining the standard of the examination in consonance with recent developments. As such, there cannot be any challenge in respect of power to amend the Regulation, which is derived by the respondent from the Act itself. The provisions of Act and Regulation have not been challenged in the present petition. 8. He had further submitted that the contention of the petitioner that the amendment is being given retrospective effect is also incorrect since the number of chances, given earlier before coming into force of the amendment on May 25, 2012, has not been taken into account. Admittedly, the petitioner has been given exemption in the examination of December 2011 earlier (Zero Year-which was not counted for calculating three chances), apart from three exemptions in December, 2012, June, 2013 and December, 2013. Additionally, the amendment was not applied for the term of June, 2012 since the call letters for the examination in the said term had already been dispatched to 62,670 students and applying of the amendment immediately would have created chaos. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the judgments of the Supreme Court reported in (2011) 1 SCC 150 Vijendra Kumar Verma vs. Public Service Commission, Uttarakhand & ors. and (1976) 3 SCC 585 Dr.G.Sarana vs. University of Lucknow & ors. 10. He further state that there had been 1837 students, who had been affected due to the amendment, out of which, 1836 took part in the examination of December, 2014 and June, 2015 examinations. Out of this, 350 students have already passed examination since June, 2014. The petitioner had also applied for December, 2014 examination on October 07, 2014 including the very same paper for which exemption was withdrawn as per the amendment and obtained the admit card. However, he did not appear in the examination. There would have been 150 students, who would have passed had exemption continued in June, 2014. However, none, except the petitioner, has challenged the carrying out of the amendment. They had appeared in the subsequent examination of December, 2014 and 111 out of 150 passed the same. As such, no special treatment could be given to the petitioner, different from other students. He would rely upon the following judgments in support of his contention:- (i) (2009) 11 SCC 726 All ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rks; or (ii) obtains 60 per cent or more of the total marks in any paper and a minimum of 40 per cent of the total marks (under the revised syllabus) or 35 per cent of the total marks (under the old syllabus) in each of the remaining papers of the Stage or Group (under the old syllabus), shall be allowed the benefit of carry forward of the actual marks so obtained by him in the papers in which he had obtained 60 per cent, or more marks for the purpose of computing his result in the subsequent examinations: Provided that he shall not be entitled to the benefit of exemption or carry forward mentioned in clause (i) and clause (ii) above if he has appeared for the paper in which he has the benefit of exemption or carry forward that he shall not be entitled to the benefit of exemption or carry Provided further that the candidate shall not be entitled to the benefit of exemption or carry forward on and from the examination in which he appears for the same papers or as the case may be the exemption in which he appears after the withdrawal of the exemption or carry forward Provided also that any benefit of exemption or carry forward shall be available to a student for three consecu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... titioner. (iii) The objective being to improve the standard and conduct of the examination, by limiting the exemption to three terms, which is the subjective satisfaction of the concerned authority, no fault can be found with such a stipulation in the Regulation. 14. That apart, the submission of Mr. Chaturvedi that the petitioner took advantage of the amendment and after exhausting all the three exemptions, being unsuccessful in clearing the examination has assailed the Amendment is appealing. 15. Further the action of the respondent to limit the exemptions for three consecutive terms, i.e., December, 2012; June, 2013 and December, 2013, the same being consistent with the amendment, the action of the respondent cannot be faulted. In this regard, I would like to produce Para 23 and 24 of the Judgment of the Gujarat High Court in Bimal Patel (supra) as under:- "23. It is also settled law that a court an always take judicial notice of a valid law of the land. In the cases before us, there is no dispute that the Examination Rules of 2011 has been passed in exercise of the power of enactment by way of delegated legislation and once we find that there is no illegality in passing the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
