Litigation (PIL) filed against ICAI for mistakes in question papers of November,11 Final Exam


SUMMARY OF MISTAKES IN THE CA FINAL NOVEMBER 2011 EXAMS CONDUCTED BY INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA (A BODY ESTABLISHED UNDER THE ACT OF PARLIAMENT)

(Mistakes /Errors committed by respondent 2 while setting and evaluating the papers which would have a direct impact on the marks obtained by the students)

Strategic Financial Management – Group I Paper 2

Question No. Particulars Marks Allotted
3 (a) Business valuations 10
Convertible Debentures 6
Total 16

 Advanced Management Accounting Group II Paper 5

Question Number. Particulars Marks Allotted
1 (b) Incremental Cost * 5
1 (d) Total Quality Management 1
3 (a) Activity Based Costing* 8
3 (b) Transfer Pricing 8
4 (b) Step Fixed Cost – CVP Analysis* 6
6 (a) Network Analysis 10
Total 38

MISTAKES CLASSIFIED AS FOLLOWS:

Mistakes admitted by the Respondent 2- Paper 5- Q. 3(b)= 8 marks

Mistakes apparent on the face of the record- Paper 5- Q.1. (b),1 (d), 3(a), 6(a)= 24 marks , Paper 2- Q.3(a), 3(b)= 16 marks

Mistakes confirmed by experts and subject to interpretation- Paper 5- Q.4 (b)= 6 marks

CITATIONS OF HON’BLE SUPREME COURT FOR GRANTING THE PRAYER

Sahiti and Ors. Vs. Respondent: The Chancellor, Dr. N.T.R. University of Health Sciences and Ors 6202 of 2008/ Decided on 22.10.2008.

-“The above decision deals with the right of the student or candidate to claim re-examination/re evaluation of his answer sheet and the power of the High Court to order revaluation of answer sheets. It does not deal with the power of the Board to order re-evaluation of answer books if factual scenario so demands. Award of marks by an examiner has to be fair and considering the fact that re-evaluation is not permissible under the Statute at the instance of candidate, the examiner has to be careful, cautious and has the duty to ensure that the answers are properly evaluated. Therefore, where the authorities find that award of marks by an examiner is not fair or that the examiner was not careful in evaluating the answer scripts re-evaluation may be found necessary. There may be several instances wherein re-evaluation of the answer scripts may be required to be ordered and this Court need not make an exhaustive catalogue of the same. However, if the authorities are of the opinion that re-evaluation of the answer scripts are necessary then the Court would be slow to substitute its own views for that of those who are expert in academic matters”.

Brief Comments and Suggestion for revaluation necessitated because of the mistake of the respondent:

The Normal Practice in all the exams is to give Full Credit for the student who attempts the wrong question. But in this type of professional exams where students of high preparation when they see the question is wrong or confusing they may not like to take a risk and solve them. So the marks obtained by the student should be suitably adjusted, for example, if the actual marks awarded to the student is say 31% in Paper 5, His marks must be changed to (31/62)*100 = 50 Marks. This method should be the best in our opinion as the student must solve all the questions, as they are compulsory and if he is declared fail he must reappear all the four papers in the group again.

While considering the above we should first take into consideration the psychology of the student who will have to write answer to the question asked. If there is confusion because of the errors, the student will not be in a position to handle it. If we take Question no. 3(a) in SFM, even a normal person will know that it is a glaring mistake but the institute solved it with the mistake and awarded marks for the students who did the mistake. So, if a student identifies the mistake (no one will take the risk), he would not have got marks.

Let us take a similar situation, Question No. 1(b) or 3 (b) in paper 5, in spite of being asked wrongly they were solved after taking into consideration the mistake. Thus a student who identifies the mistake and solves would have got marks (total confusion and lack of clarity arising out of the wrong setting of the papers).

Question No. 3 (a), the answer given assumes that introduction of ABC will reduce the cost which is a total mistake, as ABC helps only in scientific ascertainment of cost of a product and it is not a tool of cost reduction. So, no student would have answered according the examiners expectation and would have got very low marks for the correct answer.

Question No. 4 (b), the workings given in the answer are not asked in the question. First of all the question should have been asked to calculate the Break Even Point. Whereas the actual question is to calculate the number of students required to cross the Break Even Point. Crossing may be just crossing or anything more. No student would have done the working as it was not asked. So, he would have lost marks for the same on account of the fault of the respondent.

Question No. 1 (d), inspection of raw material is taken as a preventive cost in the suggested answer. The Same question was asked in May 2011 where the suggested answer says it is an appraisal cost. So, if one is correct the other should have been wrong even according to the respondent 2.

Download remaining full content of PIL against ICAI : Click Here

About these ads

  1. #1 by mr xyz on July 15, 2013 - 5:49 PM

    Valuation of CA Papers. Who is doing??? a CA? A professional having required Knowledge?
    No by PU II / B. Com students… Good naaa???

  2. #2 by sonu on July 10, 2012 - 5:01 PM

    when is the final decision for the case

  3. #3 by C A study & Coaching Classes Mumbai on July 3, 2012 - 10:52 PM

    One more case of this type awarding less marks & mistake in totalling of marks have been filed by a Final student Mr Suhas in Karnataka High court, His case is very very strong with all evidence & Hearing is on 4th July 2012. ICAI is also worried about the decision in this case as All necessary evidence going gement agst ICAI has been accepted by High Court & ICAI has been issued a an Emergent Notice summons. Wait This judgement will surely go agst ICAI & Results & marks of NOV 2012 will be recasted for all, & Possibly Results of MAY 2012 will be Monitered very minutely

  4. #4 by akashbafna on May 21, 2012 - 8:26 PM

    how much time left for final decision

  5. #5 by Anonymous on April 30, 2012 - 3:19 PM

    kya sach me institute aisa kar sakta hai.
    and judgement ke liye kitane din rukna padega .

  6. #6 by Bhavesh Jain on April 26, 2012 - 6:44 PM

    So, Mr. Dushyant Kumar, what was the final judgement of this PIL case against ICAI, is institute is going to give marks for those mistakes. Pls reply.

    • #7 by Dushyant Kumar (Maddy) on April 27, 2012 - 12:33 AM

      Hello Bhavesh,
      PIT filed on 25th day of April, Final judgement is not come yet.

      we all known the fact that there is no hope to get justice from ICAI. ICAI is pretty much aware all the facts for this mistakes, they also having some safe side. seamlessly no one stand against ICAI. the first time someone filed PIL against the said matter. Hope we get justice from the bullishness and dadagiri of ICAI.

      • #8 by Bhavesh Jain on April 27, 2012 - 2:40 PM

        Okay, Thanks dude. I think its waste of time to wait for judgement and we should start preparing for the exams. Thanks for reply.

    • #9 by maheshkumar on April 27, 2012 - 1:03 AM

      CHENNAI COURT
      CASE STATUS INFORMATION SYSTEM

      Case Status: Pending
      Status Of: WRIT PETITION
      Case No.: 5042
      Year : 2012
      Petitioner : V. VENKATA SIVA KUMAR
      Respondent : INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED
      Pet’s Advocate : M/S.SATISH PARASARAN
      Res’s Advocate : M/S.S.RAMASUBRAMANIAM & A
      Category : Service
      Last Listed on: No Date Mentioned
      Case Updated on : Apr 10 2012
      No Connected Application(s) No Connected Matter(s)

      Note:Status as on 26th April 2012. The said status can be viewed in http://www.hcmadras.tn.nic.in/ under services.

    • #10 by Dushyant Kumar (Maddy) on April 27, 2012 - 11:22 PM

      good for preparing for next attempt without waiting for result of the PIT.

  7. #11 by Neha Sharma on April 26, 2012 - 5:48 PM

    IM HEARTLY PLEASED WITH THIS PIL … I REALLY WANT JUSTICE.. ICAI KI DADAGIRI BAND KARNI CHAHIYE.

    i SAW MY XEROX COPIES AND I FOUND THAT THEY DIRECTLY GIVE ZERO EVEN IF THE QUESTION IS FULLY ATTEMPTED . AND THEY CLAIM THAT THEY PROVIDE STEP MARKING. SO ITS PROVED THIS TIME THAT THEIR COPIES R NOT CHECKED BY PROFESSIONALS. MORE SO I HAVE SEEN MY COPIES AND CHECKD THE ANWERS WHICH R CORRECT AS WELL .. BUT STILL AWARED ZERO..

    i WANT JUSTICE

  8. #12 by Anonymous on April 25, 2012 - 3:45 PM

    hamare sath majak mt kiya kro………………..

  9. #13 by Jayesh Bothra on April 24, 2012 - 3:21 PM

    if the said marks are increased i will pass both group. i want to know that should i take any action or wait for decision of deciding authority?????/

  10. #14 by Sachin Joshi (@sazhin) on April 23, 2012 - 5:19 PM

    Dude.. I got 55 in Advanced Management Accounting in Nov 2011. Will I clear that subject now ???

    • #15 by Dushyant Kumar (Maddy) on April 23, 2012 - 9:48 PM

      No Sachin,.
      The reason is that ICAI said that we will already adjusted the said amount while awarded numbers to the answers sheet.

  11. #16 by Anonymous on April 23, 2012 - 12:51 PM

    God…. What a hell is this. How a student can get a pass if such irresponsible experts exist in ICAI. ??IS THIS IS THE STANDARD OF icai.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: