2018 (10) TMI 407 - HC - Indian Laws

Appeal challenging exam results dismissed as mistakes don't confer legal rights. Committee decision upheld.

The Court dismissed the appeal challenging examination results declared by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India for November 2017 exams. The ... Clearance of Group1 and II final examination in November, 2017 - mailing of incorrect list to Aurangabad branch, but was not uploaded in any website - dispute relates to the result declared by the respondent-institute. The appellants claim that they had cleared Group I/II as per the result circulated through Whatsapp messages and uploaded on Facebook. However, as per result uploaded on the official website of the respondent-institute and the mark-sheets downloaded by them they had not cleared the respective Groups. Held that:- What is important and clinches the controversy, is the fact that the respondent- Institute had uploaded the correct list on their website at 05:38 p.m. on 17th January, 2018. This uploading on the website of the respondent-Institute was earlier and prior to the point of time viz. the e-mail was sent to the Aurangabad branch. We do not think any right accrues or any benefit can be extended to the appellants as an incorrect list was mailed to the Aurangabad branch. The list e-mailed to the Aurangabad branch was never uploaded on the website of the said branch nor communicated to the appellants or others officially. On learning about the lapse and error, immediate steps were taken and the correct list within a few hours was mailed to the Aurangabad branch at 09:57 p.m. on 17th January, 2018. Aurangabad branch had only thereafter uploaded the result at 12:05 a.m. on 18th January, 2018. The incorrect list mailed earlier to the Aurangabad branch was not uploaded on any official website. We would accept that the respondent- Institute should have been careful and exercised care and caution and do recognise the triumph and pain suffered by the appellants and others, albeit this cannot be a ground to allow the appeal. A mistake and error cannot confer a legal right. Appeal dismissed. Issues:Challenge to the dismissal of writ petition regarding examination results based on incorrect list circulated through social media and subsequent correction.Analysis:1. Factual Background: The case involves an appeal against the dismissal of a writ petition filed by a group of petitioners challenging the examination results declared by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) for Group I and II final examinations conducted in November 2017.2. Contentions of Appellants: The appellants claimed to have passed the exams based on result information circulated through unofficial channels like Whatsapp and Facebook, showing successful clearance of the groups. However, the official website and mark-sheets reflected their failure.3. Committee Decision: The Examination Committee decided to restrict the total moderation factor to 13 marks despite a suggestion for 25 marks. They granted grace marks to candidates in various papers and recommended revisions in marks evaluated by certain examiners.4. Discrepancy in Result: An incorrect list, with marks calculated based on the 25-mark moderation suggestion, was mistakenly sent to an affiliated branch, leading to confusion among candidates. The correct list was uploaded on the official website earlier than the incorrect list circulated through social media.5. Legal Stand: The Court held that the incorrect list sent through unofficial channels did not confer any legal right to the appellants. Immediate corrective measures were taken once the error was identified, and the correct list was subsequently communicated to the concerned branch.6. Judgment: The Court acknowledged the disappointment faced by the appellants due to the error but emphasized that a mistake does not create a legal entitlement. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and no costs were awarded.This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues, arguments presented by the parties, committee decisions, discrepancy in result communication, legal stand taken by the Court, and the final judgment rendered in the case.