writ petition was filed by the appellant who is a student of respondent No.1- Institute of Chartered Accountants of India. He gave the Final Examination of the respondents in November, 2013. He did not qualify. He thereafter applied for Suggestive Answers, Re-evaluation of the marks and Certified copy of his answer sheet.
In the absence of any provision under the statute or statutory rules/regulations, the Court should not generally direct revaluation.”
In Pramod Kumar Srivastava v. Chairman, Bihar Public Service Commission, Patna & Ors.(supra) the Supreme Court held as follows
“7………….This question was examined in considerable detail in Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education and Anr. v. Paritosh Bhupesh Kurmarsheth and Ors., AIR 1984 SC 1543. In this case, the relevant rules provided for verification (scrutiny of marks) on an application made to that effect by a candidate. Some of the students filed writ petitions praying that they may be allowed to inspect the answer-books and the Board be directed to conduct re-evaluation of such of the answer-books as the petitioners may demand after inspection. The High Court held that the rule providing for verification of marks gave an implied power to the examinees to demand a disclosure and inspection and also to seek reevaluation of the answer-books. The judgment of the High Court was set aside and it was held that in absence of a specific provision conferring a right upon an examinee to have his answer-books re-evaluated, no such direction can be issued. There is no dispute that under the relevant rule of the Commission there is no provision entitling a candidate to have his answer-books re-evaluated. In such a situation, the prayer made by the appellant in the writ petition was wholly untenable and the learned Single Judge had clearly erred in having the answer-book of the appellant re-evaluated.”
Hence, in view of the above legal position no grounds can be made out for any direction from this court for re-evaluation of the answer sheets of the appellant.
As per Regulation 39(7) of the Chartered Accountants Regulations, 1988 ,where the result of an examination is affected by an error, malpractice, fraud, improper conduct etc., the respondents have the power to amend such result. It does not deal with re-evaluation of paper books on an individual request of a candidate. Even otherwise there is no error in the facts of this case
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 23.05.2016
MOHIT GOYAL …….Appellant
THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA AND ORS. ….. Respondents