TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 794X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at this stage. In any case, even assuming that he had applied for exemption, he was not entitled having exhausted three attempts under Regulations of 2012 - appeal dismissed. - LPA 450/2017 - - - Dated:- 13-11-2018 - MR G.S. SISTANI AND MR JYOTI SINGH, JJ. For The Respondent : Mr. G.S. Chaturvedi, Advocate ORDER JYOTI SINGH, J. 1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 27.02.2017 whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition bearing W.P.(C) No. 6772/2014 upholding the action of the respondents in denying exemption to the appellant from appearing in the Business Valuation Paper in the Cost and Management Accountants Examination (hereinafter referred to as CMA ) conducted in June, 2014. Although, the appellant had in the writ petition sought a declaration that he was entitled for the exemption and he should be declared a successful candidate in the final CMA Examination but at the time of admission of this appeal on 11.07.2017, the appellant had only contended that he had applied for exemption but was not informed of its outcome. This according to him had prejudiced him as else he could have appeared in the said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er the syllabus of 2008. The appellant then appeared in the June, 2011 examination and then for the final examination in December, 2011. In the said examination, the appellant scored more than 60% in paper 18 i.e. Business Valuation Management of Group IV , whilst he could not clear the Group IV. At this point in time, the Regulations applicable to the Institute were Cost and Works Accountants Regulations, 1959. Regulation 41(2) of the Cost and Works Accountants Regulations, 1959 granted an exemption to those students who scored 60% marks in a given paper from appearing in that paper in subsequent attempts and this was for an unlimited period. 4. The appellant again appeared in the examination conducted in June, 2012, wherein he was granted exemption in Paper No. 18 having scored over 60% marks. In the meantime, a Notification dated 25.05.2012 was issued by The Institute of Cost Accountants of India amending the regulations of 1959. By virtue of this amendment to Regulation 41(2) the benefit of exemption to a student who scored over 60% marks was now restricted to three consecutive terms only, immediately succeeding the term in which such exemption had accrued. For an e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 consecutive terms immediately succeeding the term in which such exemption or carry forward has accrued. 5. Although, the amendment had come into force, the appearance of the appellant in June, 2012 was not counted as a chance and he was granted exemption for three consecutive terms in December, 2012, June, 2013 and December, 2013, respectively. Therefore, as per the Amendment, the appellant exhausted his three chances of exemption in December, 2013. 6. In June, 2014, the appellant again appeared in the final CMA Exam but did not appear for Paper 18 . When the result was published on 23.08.2014, he was shown absent in this paper. The case set up by the appellant in the writ petition before the learned Single Judge was that on seeing that he was marked Absent , he made oral and written representations to the Institute, that the amendment of 2012 would only apply prospectively and he shoul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tended before us that he had applied for exemption in the June, 2014 Examination but he received no communication from the Institute regarding the same and therefore, being under an impression that he was exempted, he did not appear in the said examination. In support of his contention, he has drawn attention of this Court to an Online Application Form placed at Page No. 364 of the paper book. It was pointed out that in the column relating to exemption, he has filled in the figure 18 indicating that he had sought exemption in this paper. Scanned copy of the said document is reproduced herein below:- 9. The respondents on the other hand vehemently contended that the appellant could not have sought exemption by writing the figure 18 in hand as this was an Online Form and writing by pen or pencil could not be done. He also submitted that in view of this position, there was no request for exemption at all made by the appellant to the Institute. In so far as the non-communication of the exemption not being granted is concerned, the learned counsel for the respondent argued that firstly, since there was no request for exemption, there was no question of responding to the sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ence post the Examination of June, 2014. Hence, this Court rejects the contention of the appellant that any exemption in Paper 18 was sought by the appellant. 12. Having perused the various documents pointed out to us by the learned counsel for the respondents, this Court finds force in the contention of the respondent that the amendment was duly notified in the Gazette as well the prospectus and the appellant ought to have been vigilant to find out the Rules and Instructions relating to the examination. Having not acted with due diligence, appellant cannot be given the benefit of the exemption and can neither be permitted to appear in the Examination of the final court at this stage. In any case, even assuming that he had applied for exemption, he was not entitled having exhausted three attempts under Regulations of 2012. The learned Single Judge has rightly held that the amendment has been correctly applied and benefit of three exemptions having been granted to the appellant, he cannot be granted any further exemption. We find no merit in the appeal and the judgment of the learned Single Judge is hereby upheld. 13. The present appeal is dismissed with no orders as to cost ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
