2012 (5) TMI 80 - HC - Indian Laws

Permission to allow writer to the Differently Abled Candidates by ICAI during exam - Guidelines prescribing the procedure to be followed regarding granting of Writer to the Differently Abled Candidates - objection raised on the points that the Writer should not be above 20 years of age, Writer should be the same person for all the papers of an examination and should not be a relative of the candidate Held that - Merit in the contention of the petitioner that in this season of examinations, any under 20 years of age person is likely to be busy in his/her own examination - The purpose of the respondent ICAI of preventing use of unfair means, can be taken care of by allowing only those person, even if related to the examinee and even if over 20 years of age, who are not familiar with the subject of examination, other persons irrespective of relationship and age should be allowed by the respondent to act as Writer - a need to change the Writer for the reasons beyond the control of the examinee or the Writer would be allowed - directions are only for the current examinations - Examination Committee in its meeting will be entitled to take its own decision after considering the difficulties pointed out by the petitioner.

Summary

Issues:
Challenging Guidelines for Differently Abled Candidates' Writers in Examinations.

Analysis:
The petitioner, an Advocate, raised concerns regarding the Guidelines for granting 'Writer' and extra time to Differently Abled Candidates during examinations conducted by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI). The petitioner argued that the prescribed Guidelines were arbitrary and impractical, affecting the candidates' right to take the examination. Specific conditions for Writers were highlighted, including age restrictions and restrictions on relatives acting as Writers. The petitioner objected to these conditions, particularly the age limit of 20 years for Writers, the requirement for the same Writer for all papers, and the prohibition of relatives as Writers.

The petitioner had previously approached the Chief Commissioner under the Disabilities Act to address the issue with ICAI. Despite the Chief Commissioner's directive, ICAI did not amend the Guidelines, leading to the filing of this public interest petition. The respondent ICAI acknowledged the grievances raised and scheduled a meeting of the Examination Committee to address the concerns expressed by the petitioner.

The Court found certain conditions imposed by ICAI unnecessary, such as the age limit for Writers and the restriction on relatives acting as Writers. It was noted that preventing unfair means could be achieved by allowing qualified individuals not familiar with the exam subject to act as Writers, regardless of age or relationship to the examinee. The Court directed that only those familiar with the subject matter should be prohibited from acting as Writers, while others should be allowed.

Regarding the change of Writer, the respondent ICAI agreed that changes could be permitted under exceptional circumstances beyond the control of the examinee or Writer. The Court directed ICAI to allow changes under such circumstances. These directions were specified to apply only to the current examinations, with the Examination Committee having the authority to make further decisions after considering the issues raised in the petition.

The Court disposed of the writ petition with the provided directions, clarifying that any future amendments to the Guidelines by ICAI could be challenged in court if the petitioner remained aggrieved. The judgment emphasized that the current directions were specific to the ongoing examinations and did not reflect a final opinion on the matter.