TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether an internal result communication allegedly circulated to branches and centres could override the official result published on the Institute's websites, and whether Regulation 39(7) of the Chartered Accountants Regulations, 1988 was attracted; (ii) Whether the Institute was bound to disclose a fixed criteria for moderation of marks under Regulation 39(2) of the Chartered Accountants Regulations, 1988.
Issue (i): Whether an internal result communication allegedly circulated to branches and centres could override the official result published on the Institute's websites, and whether Regulation 39(7) of the Chartered Accountants Regulations, 1988 was attracted.
Analysis: The alleged notification was not shown to have been published as an official result to the students and was, at best, an internal communication. The official result was found to have been published only once on the Institute's websites, which constituted the final and operative result. Internal notings or communications do not acquire legal effect unless they culminate in a final communicated order. Since there was no alteration of the published result, the provision empowering amendment of an already published result on specified grounds did not apply.
Conclusion: The challenge based on the alleged internal notification failed, and Regulation 39(7) was held inapplicable.
Issue (ii): Whether the Institute was bound to disclose a fixed criteria for moderation of marks under Regulation 39(2) of the Chartered Accountants Regulations, 1988.
Analysis: Regulation 39(2) confers discretion on the Council to revise marks for maintaining the prescribed pass percentage. The criterion for moderation necessarily depends on the overall performance in each examination and cannot be fixed in advance in a rigid manner. Requiring a predetermined formula would undermine the discretionary function intended by the regulation.
Conclusion: No mandamus to disclose a fixed moderation criteria was warranted.
Final Conclusion: The writ petition was held to be without merit because the official result remained unchanged and the grievances relating to alleged internal communications and moderation policy did not justify interference.
Ratio Decidendi: Internal communications have no legal effect as a final result, and the power to amend an already published result under the examination regulations arises only when the official published result itself is sought to be altered.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
