9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 407X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e present appeal has been preferred by nine petitioners and thirteen writ petitioners have not preferred intra court appeal against the decision. 3. This appeal, as was the writ petition, is contested by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, the Respondent-institute for short, a body created under the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949. 4. The respondent-institute had conducted Group1 and II final examination in November, 2017 in which the appellants like many others had appeared. 5. The 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. They rely on the screenshots. 6. The appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting 2 6 II Information Systems Control and Audit 2 7 II Direct Tax Laws 7 8 II Indirect Tax Laws 2 1(b) Add marks as follows, to all the candidates who appeared in the paper-2 (Strategic Financial Management) of Final Special examination held in November, 2017 held at Chennai only: Paper No Group Subject Marks added 2 1 Strategic Financial Management 6 2. Further, the Committee noted that the HE/AHEs have also recommended revision of marks in the answer books evaluated by certain examiners who had either undervalued or overvalued them marginally. After discussions, Committee accepted the recommendations of the HE/AHEs and decided that in scuh cases where they had recommended revision ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and uploaded on Facebook was based on the internal e-mail sent by the respondent-institute to their Aurangabad branch and others associated or affiliated with the said branch at 06:57 p.m. on 17th January, 2018. It was submitted that as per list enclosed, the appellants had cleared Group I or II or both, as the case may be. However, subsequently the result was changed and the appellants were declared unsuccessful. 10. The stand of respondent-institute, which has been accepted in the impugned judgment, is that the list sent to the Aurangabad branch at 06:57 p.m. was an incorrect list sent by mistake. In the said list, marks were calculated on paperwise moderation of upto 25 marks as was suggested by the Chair, which suggestion was not acce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
