Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Recognition of Degree and Eligibility for Articleship - Recent amendments have impacted the recognition status of degrees, affecting eligibility to apply for articleship. Several sources indicate that if a degree is no longer recognized due to amendments, the applicant cannot qualify for articleship under the current regulations. For example, one document states, no recognition is granted to the degree of a candidate from a certain college due to amendments, implying the applicant's degree may no longer qualify ["Sarwankumar Mandhwani VS Union of India - Bombay"].
Impact of Amendments on Recognition Status - Amendments to regulations or schedules can explicitly remove certain degrees from recognized qualifications. One source notes, entries no longer form part of the Second Schedule from 17th November, 1999, indicating that degrees obtained from certain institutions or under certain conditions are no longer recognized ["Sarwankumar Mandhwani VS Union of India - Bombay"]. This change directly affects the applicant's eligibility to undertake articleship if their degree falls into this category.
Specific Cases of Degree Recognition and Disqualification - Several cases highlight that degrees from certain universities or institutions, especially if not recognized after amendments, result in disqualification from applying for articleship. For instance, the degree granted by Punjab University is recognized under Section 11 of the Act, but if amendments exclude such degrees, the applicant's qualification becomes invalid ["Robin Kaushik VS Union Public Service Commission Etc. - Punjab and Haryana"]. Similarly, degrees from institutions not listed in the updated schedule are not recognized, leading to ineligibility ["Sarwankumar Mandhwani VS Union of India - Bombay"].
Effect of Amendments on Existing Recognized Degrees - Amendments can also affect degrees previously recognized. For example, the recognition of degrees from certain colleges was withdrawn after amendments, which means applicants holding such degrees may lose eligibility ["Nawal Kishore Sharma VS State of Rajasthan - Rajasthan"].
Analysis and Conclusion:Recent amendments to regulations and schedules have led to the withdrawal of recognition for certain degrees, rendering applicants ineligible to apply for articleship if their degree is no longer recognized. The key factor is whether the applicant's degree falls within the recognized qualifications post-amendment. If the degree is excluded due to these amendments, the applicant cannot proceed with articleship applications under the current regulatory framework ["NIKKITHA K J v/s THE UNION OF INDIA - Karnataka"] ["Sarwankumar Mandhwani VS Union of India - Bombay"]. Therefore, the applicant's inability to apply for articleship is due to the recent amendments that have revoked recognition of their degree.
In the competitive world of professional qualifications like Chartered Accountancy (CA), securing articleship is a critical step. But what happens when a recent regulatory amendment leads to your degree no longer being recognized? A common concern arises: due to recent amendment, the Applicant can no longer apply for articleship because his degree no longer recognised. This question strikes at the heart of eligibility rules under bodies like the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI).
This post dives into the legal nuances, drawing from key documents and related case law. While general principles suggest no automatic disqualification, explicit requirements matter. Note: This is informational content based on available materials and not personalized legal advice. Consult a qualified professional for your situation.
Articleship, or practical training, is mandatory for CA students under the Chartered Accountants Regulations, 1988. Typically lasting 2-3 years, it requires registration with ICAI and often a commerce-related degree or equivalent qualification. Regulations like 65 and 78 govern permissions for concurrent courses or other pursuits.
Eligibility hinges on meeting educational criteria at the time of application. But does a post-enrollment amendment automatically invalidate prior qualifications? Legal documents indicate otherwise without explicit provisions. CHONG SWEE HUAT & ANOR vs LIM SHIAN GHEE T/A L & G CONSULTANTS & EDUCATION SERVICES - 2009 MarsdenLR 247 notes that degrees from certain foreign institutions like St Clements University are not government-recognized unless prior acknowledgment exists, emphasizing that recognition must be explicitly communicated or established as a condition.
Based on analyzed documents, there is no explicit legal provision or judicial ruling indicating that an amendment to a regulation or law automatically disqualifies a candidate from applying for articleship solely because their degree is no longer recognizedBENJAMIN LIM SIAW MING vs SYARIKAT SESCO BERHAD - 2023 MarsdenLR 542. Key points include:
In CHONG SWEE HUAT & ANOR vs LIM SHIAN GHEE T/A L & G CONSULTANTS & EDUCATION SERVICES - 2009 MarsdenLR 247, it's clear: recognition or accreditation must be explicitly communicated or established as a condition for employment or application. Without this, eligibility typically remains intact.
Verification of degree recognition is a duty, but lapses don't automatically disqualify applicants. BENJAMIN LIM SIAW MING vs SYARIKAT SESCO BERHAD - 2023 MarsdenLR 542 discusses misconduct for agreements with unrecognized institutions, stating failure to verify is an issue but not linking it to automatic articleship bans due to amendments.
No document references a law stating automatic disqualification post-amendment. The principle is procedural: regulators must communicate changes. HENG AIOK TUANG vs PESONA PERMAI DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD - 2003 MarsdenLR 2191 requires recognition for auditors but doesn't tie amendments to instant ineligibility.
Indian courts have addressed articleship eligibility in various contexts, reinforcing diligence and explicit rules:
In a Karnataka High Court case NIKKITHA K J Vs THE UNION OF INDIA, a petitioner pursued B.Com alongside CMA Foundation and articleship, obtaining Form 112 permission under Regulations 65 and 78. The court quashed ICAI's membership denial, stressing the student's diligence Nikkitha K. J. , D/O K. Janakiraman VS Union of India, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, New Delhi, Represented By Its Secretary - 2023 Supreme(Kar) 592. This highlights that permissions and completions matter more than technical snags.
Another case involved sabbatical leave for articleship JESLIN S CHUNGATH vs CHIEF MANAGER - 2018 Supreme(Online)(KER) 41830. The court directed compassionate consideration, noting impacts on CA exams and training completion.
Eligibility for CA Final exams was scrutinized in Suravarapu Palani Prabhu Teja VS Institute of Chartered Accountants of India - 2024 Supreme(Telangana) 612, where excess leave led to denial despite partial training. The court upheld strict adherence to Regulations 29D and 50, dismissing the petition for non-completion.
COVID-related transfers and re-registrations were examined Suravarapu Palani Prabhu Teja vs Institute of Chartered Accountants of India - 2024 Supreme(Online)(Telangana) 47626, emphasizing practical training fulfillment without automatic bars for disruptions if requirements are met.
These cases show courts favor fairness, permissions, and completion over rigid disqualifications unless regulations explicitly demand otherwise. Amendments derecognizing degrees mirror this: no automatic bar without notice.
While documents don't support automatic disqualification, caveats exist:- Explicit Rules: If regulations or notices mandate recognition as a condition, non-compliance disqualifies CHONG SWEE HUAT & ANOR vs LIM SHIAN GHEE T/A L & G CONSULTANTS & EDUCATION SERVICES - 2009 MarsdenLR 247.- Retroactivity: Assess if amendments apply backward and if applicants were notified.- Other Qualifications: Cases like medical appointments Sheikh Javeed Ahmad VS State of J&K - 2025 Supreme(SC) 953 or property successions Shantadevi P. Gaekwad VS Sangramsinh P. Gaekwad - 1995 Supreme(Guj) 246 underscore that derecognition (e.g., post-26th Amendment) doesn't divest rights unless specified.
In amendments to pleadings or procedures Alberto Culver Company VS VOI Fashion Stores - 2005 Supreme(Del) 1180, courts allow clarifications if they don't alter suit nature, paralleling how regulators might handle degree issues.
To navigate this:1. Verify Criteria: Check ICAI or relevant authority notices for explicit recognition mandates.2. Seek Clarification: Contact the institute; permissions via Form 112 have helped in courts Nikkitha K. J. , D/O K. Janakiraman VS Union of India, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, New Delhi, Represented By Its Secretary - 2023 Supreme(Kar) 592.3. Document Diligence: Maintain records of enrollment timing relative to amendments.4. Explore Alternatives: Concurrent courses or transfers succeeded with proper procedure JESLIN S CHUNGATH vs CHIEF MANAGER - 2018 Supreme(Online)(KER) 41830.
In Anubha Shrivastava Sahai VS Union Of India - 2021 Supreme(SC) 866, flexibility in articleship completion was noted, especially for health issues, suggesting regulators may accommodate.
Generally, a recent amendment derecognizing your degree does not automatically prevent articleship applications. Legal materials stress explicit communication of criteria EVERISE HECTARES SDN BHD vs CITIBANK BHD - 2010 MarsdenLR 3087BENJAMIN LIM SIAW MING vs SYARIKAT SESCO BERHAD - 2023 MarsdenLR 542, and courts prioritize diligence over technicalities. However, always confirm current rules, as positions may evolve.
Key Takeaways:- No blanket prohibition from unrecognized degrees post-amendment.- Explicit regulatory communication is key to disqualification.- Courts support eligible candidates with proper permissions.- Seek authority clarification promptly.
Stay informed on ICAI updates to safeguard your CA journey. For tailored advice, reach out to legal experts or ICAI directly.
References:1. BENJAMIN LIM SIAW MING vs SYARIKAT SESCO BERHAD - 2023 MarsdenLR 5422. CHONG SWEE HUAT & ANOR vs LIM SHIAN GHEE T/A L & G CONSULTANTS & EDUCATION SERVICES - 2009 MarsdenLR 2473. EVERISE HECTARES SDN BHD vs CITIBANK BHD - 2010 MarsdenLR 30874. HENG AIOK TUANG vs PESONA PERMAI DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD - 2003 MarsdenLR 2191
#ArticleshipEligibility, #CAIndia, #DegreeRecognition
In the month of May 2017, she joins B.Com degree at ASC Evening Degree College. Simultaneously, she enrolled herself for a course in CMA Foundation. ... Before joining Articleship training, since she had already enrolled to B.Com degree course, she sought permission by submitting Form 112 in terms of Regulations 65 and 78 of the Regulations. The petitioner was granted permission. ... On 27-08-2018, the petitioner joins Chartered Accountant Articleship training. ... My articleship comm....
In the month of May 2017, she joins B.Com degree at ASC Evening Degree College. Simultaneously, she enrolled herself for a course in CMA Foundation. ... Before joining Articleship training, since she had already enrolled to B.Com degree course, she sought permission by submitting Form 112 in terms of Regulations 65 and 78 of the Regulations. The petitioner was granted permission. ... Therefore, the petitioner had enrolled herself to several courses and completed all of them except B.Com. degree course w....
Before joining Articleship training, since she had already enrolled to B.Com degree course, she sought permission by submitting Form 112 in terms of Regulations 65 and 78 of the Regulations. ... In the month of May 2017, she joins B.Com degree at ASC Evening Degree College. Simultaneously, she enrolled herself for a course in CMA Foundation. ... My articleship commenced on 27th August 2018. ... The petitioner completes her B.Com degree in September, 2020. After comple....
After availing sabbatical leave, she joined for Articleship at a firm of Chartered Accountants and she has already completed 2 years of Articleship as on 17.12.2017. ... She points out that the period of Articleship is between 2 ½ to 3 years and therefore, she has to be on Articleship upto December 2018 or otherwise she will not be able to appear for the examination. The leave granted to her was already over by 15.12.2017. ... She submits that she had completed her Bachelor Degree in Commerce by privat....
Lalitha Bisale and worked at Bangalore for 89 days and got Petitioner’s Articleship Training transfer to Hyderabad as Petitioner was facing hardship due to Covid-19 norms at Bangalore and after Petitioner got Petitioner’s Articleship terminated at Bangalore, Petitioner resumed and continued Petitioner ... ’s Articleship training under CA one Sri P. ... It is further the case of the Petitioner that when the Petitioner was applying online for the CA Final examination to be conducted in November 2023 an error message was sh....
However, no experience is necessary for the candidates possessing the 3 years recognised degree of DM/M Ch. Or qualification recognised equivalent thereto.” ... institution in the subject of speciality after obtaining the Degree of DM/M C.H. (2 years or 5 years recognised course after MBBS) or qualification recognised equivalent thereto. ... institution in the subject of speciality after obtaining the qualifying degree of MD/MS or a qualification recognised#....
However, instances occurred in the recent past where it was later on ascertained that the said degree from a candidate of the same college is not approved by M.C.I. ... In 1998, the applicant-petitioner had not imagined that the degree for which he had successfully studied would be questioned by the Medical Council of India. ... The degree of M.S. (Surgery) granted by the Punjab University is a recognised degree under Section 11(1) of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1....
That candidate would be permitted to appear in the back up examination, to be conducted by the Institute in due course. ... There is flexibility of completion of articleship as per the discretion of the Principal professional under whom the student is undergoing training. Therefore, it is not possible for complete waiver of the articleship. ... Instead, it needs to be expanded in the following terms: (i) A candidate shall be entitled to exercise the option of opting out if he/she personally, or any of his/her family me....
Lalitha Bisale and w orked at Bangalore for 89 days and got Petitioner’s Articleship Training transfer to Hyderabad as Petitioner w as facing hardship due to Covid-19 norms at Bangalore and after Petitioner got Petitioner’s Articleship terminated at Bangalore, ... of Articleship training requirements. ... himself for practical training on 26.04.2021 but after serving for a period of 89 days, Petitioner terminated his articleship and re-registered the article-ship after a gap of 20 days due#....
Lalitha Bisale and w orked at Bangalore for 89 days and got Petitioner’s Articleship Training transfer to Hyderabad as Petitioner w as facing hardship due to Covid-19 norms at Bangalore and after Petitioner got Petitioner’s Articleship terminated at Bangalore, ... of Articleship training requirements. ... himself for practical training on 26.04.2021 but after serving for a period of 89 days, Petitioner terminated his articleship and re-registered the article-ship after a gap of 20 days due#....
Judge even after the Central amendment to the C.P.C. con¬tinue to possess a revisional jurisdiction by virtue of the Orissa Act, 26 of 1991 yet while exercising revisional jurisdic¬tion, the Learned District Judge shall no longer be guided by the amended proviso to the Orissa Amendment but by the amended provi¬so to Section 115, C.P.C. brought about by the Central Act Amend¬ment, 1999. 9. Therefore, on the basic of above comparison, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the vesting of juris¬diction has not undergone any amendment, whatsoever and, there¬fore, Orissa Amendment Act,....
The present, in my opinion, is a case where the proposed amendment simply clarifies a factual position which could but was not for any reason stated initially. Simply because the defendants can, after the amendment, no longer pray for dismissal of the suit for the alleged suppression of facts is no reason to deny the amendment prayed for.
It provides for filing an application for judicial review instead of seeking any particular writ and the Court can grant appropriate relief even though it is not asked for. The House of Lords (details below) explained the changes as follows :an applicant for relief will no longer be defeated merely because he has chosen to apply for the wrong remedy. . . . . they (Order 53 of Rule of the Supreme Court) were designed to stop the technical procedural arguments which had too often arisen and thus marred the true administration of justice, whether a particular applicant had pur....
The effect of the covenant however came to an end on coming into force of the 26th Amendment. He admittedly breathed his last on 1st September 1988. The last ruler no longer remained a recognised ruler after the 26th Amendment. In that view of the matter, he became an ordinary citizen so far as the law of the land is concerned.
Counsel for the parties have agreed that in view of the recent amendment, the question with regard to the pecuniary jurisdiction will no longer survive.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
