- (1.) Being dissatisfied with the declaration of his result of final examination of May 1993 of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (in short 'Institute') the petitioner has filed this petition. The Institute has declared petitioner to have failed in Group I of said examination, the examination being held in papers which are divided into two groups. The reliefs sought by writ petition are for quashing the petitioner's result declaring him to have failed in Group I and to issue writ, order of direction in the nature of mandamus requiring the institute to declare him to have cleared the final examination.
(2.) The facts necessary for determining present controversy are that Central Government enacted The Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 (in short 'Act') for regulating the profession of Chartered Accountants and to establish an Institute of Chartered Accountants. The Act constituted an Institute of Chartered Accountants and every member of Institute is known as chartered accountant. The Act provides for maintenance of a register under the Act and all persons whose name is entered in said register constitute a body corporate which is known by the name of Institute of Chartered Accountants. Section 4 of the Act specifies the persons who shall be entitled to have their name entered in the register which includes persons who passed such examination and completed such training as may be prescribedbed by regulations framed under the Act. The Act also provides for a Council of Institute (in short 'Council') for management of affairs of the Institute and discharge functions assigned to it under the Act. The Council has been empowered to make regulations under S.30 for the purpose of carrying out the object of Act. It is specifically provided under said provision that such regulations may provide for standard and conduct of examination under the Act and Council, in exercise of such power, framed regulations wherein it provided syllabus for examination as well as conduct of examination. It is under these regulations framed by Council that examination was conducted at which petitioner appeared giving rise to present controversy.
(3.) The papers, in which a candidate had to take examination, were divided into two groups namely, Group-I and Group-II. This was done in accordance with Chartered Accountants Regulations, 1988 (in short 'Regulations'), which provided for the standard and conduct of examination. Each group had four papers of 100 marks each, the total maximum mark of each group being 400. According to mark-sheet of petitioners the petitioner obtained 181 marks in papers of Group I and 269 marks in papers of Group II. Petitioner did obtain 40 per cent or above in each paper of Group I but in aggregate, they were less than 50 per cent in this Group and therefore he has been declared to have failed in that group. The petitioner obtained above 50 per cent in aggregate in Group II and has been held to be successful so far that group is concerned. It is admitted case of parties that petitioner took examination in both groups simultaneously and obtained 40 per cent and above marks in each paper of both the groups as well as he obtained above 50 per cent marks in aggregate of all the papers of both groups taken together.;