Case Law Details
Pragaspathy R. Vs. Institute of Cost Accountants of India & Anr. (Kolkata High Court)
Introduction: The case of Pragaspathy R. vs. Institute of Cost Accountants, as adjudicated by the Kolkata High Court, delves into the absence of provisions for re-evaluation of answer scripts under The Cost and Works Accountants Regulations, 1959. This article examines the petitioner’s plea for re-evaluation, the Institute’s stance, and the court’s decision.
Background: In 2018, the petitioner appeared for the Group-IV examination of Cost Accountancy, failing in three out of four papers. Seeking re-evaluation, the petitioner contested that correct answers were not adequately evaluated, referencing “suggested answers” provided by the Institute.
Legal Framework: The Institute argued that The Cost and Works Accountants Regulations, 1959, lack provisions for re-evaluation. Regulation 41 (5) allows candidates to apply for scrutiny but doesn’t permit re-evaluation. The Institute emphasized the significance of extensive knowledge and professional approach in answers, stating that mere correctness doesn’t guarantee marks.
Affidavit-in-Opposition: Paragraphs 8 and 9 of the affidavit-in-opposition underscore the Institute’s position, emphasizing the indicative nature of study materials and the absence of re-evaluation scope. The affidavit stresses the need for detailed knowledge and a professional approach in answers.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
