G. P. SHIVAPRAKASH, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner appeared for final examination held in November 1990, conducted by the first respondent which is the Institute of Chartered Accountants of india. The result of the said examination was declared in January, 1991. The petitioner was not successful in the said examination. Aggrieved by his failure, this petition is presented by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:" (1) Issue a writ of ccrtiorari or any other appropriate writ, order and/or direction to and against the respondents, call for the entire records and all answer papers of the petitioner pertaining to the final C. A. Examination conducted by the respondents in November 1990 and strike down as illegal and without jurisdiction the reply letter bearing No. Verifica- tion/n/90/f/ 9962/173, dated 25-2-1991, produced herein as Annexure-T, written/sent by the second respondent to the petitioner; (2) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order and/or direction directing the respondents to re-evaluate all the answer papers of the petitioner in all the eight subjects of the final C. A. Examination and to detect the error in the declaration of result of final C. A. Examination of the petitioner conducted in November 1990, and to amend the result of the petitioner in such manner as shall be in accordance with the true position and to make a declaration accordingly in accordance with Regulation 39 (7) of the Regulations. " ( 2 ) IT appears that the petitioner after the declaration of the result addressed a letter dated 27-1-1991, to the second respondent bringing to his notice that throughout his educational career he had an excellent academic record and, therefore, there was no reason for him to fail in the said examination. In the said letter, a copy of which is marked as Annexure-S, he has stated as hereunder:-"how do you expect a candidate having this academic background and who is of the honest opinion that he has the bright chances of securing paper awards in the subjects which are his specialisation and favourite (and also done extremely well) to secure marks that are much below 40% ? (Direct Tax Laws and Cost Systems and Cost Control Subjects ). (Direct Tax Laws and Cost Systems and Cost Control Subjects ). I honestly believe that Iliad done extremely well (I know the level that is expected of a C. A. final candidate who appears for that examination) and much to my surprise and mental strain, I see that none of my subject-wise marks crosses 46%. "after having said so, the petitioner has found fault with the result and requested the second respondent to do the following:" (1) find out whether any wrong feeding (keeping) has taken place while entering my marks sheet by oversight, (2) find out whether my marks sheet has gone exchanged with somebody else's marks sheet, (3) to retotal the marks awarded in my answer sheets with respect to the following subjects (both subjects in) (i) Group 1:- Advanced Accounting Paper 1 Management Accounting and financial Management, Paper 2advance Auditing. (ii) Group 2:- Direct Tax Laws Paper 1 Operation Research Combination b, Paper 2cash Systems and Cost Control Combination B Paper 4. " ( 3 ) THE petitioner has narrated in detail in the petition his academic achievements right from SSLC Examination upto B. B. M. Degree conferred by the Mysore university. It is slated in the petition that the petitioner had throughout maintained "high academic standards, securing numerous medals and awards in various examinations. The petitioner has produced copies of certificates issued by the government of Karnataka under National Scholarship Scheme in 1983 and 1986 as well as other certificates of merit Issued by other educational institutions. ( 4 ) SRI K. Poornabodha Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted, that the fact that the petitioner has such an excellent academic record by itself is proof positive that something has gone amiss in the evaluation of the answers given by the petitioner in the final examination as otherwise he could not have failed. ( 5 ) AT the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner, to ensure against any omission in the matter of valuation of answers, Sri Naganand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, has today produced the answer papers. I have seen the answer papers. All the answers given by the petitioner have been valued and there is no omission on the part of the valuer in valuing any answer given by the petitioner. There is also no mistake in the total marks awarded. I have seen the answer papers. All the answers given by the petitioner have been valued and there is no omission on the part of the valuer in valuing any answer given by the petitioner. There is also no mistake in the total marks awarded. In these circumstances, Sri naganand submitted that in view of the fact that there is no provision in the examination scheme for revaluation of the answers given by the petitioner in the examination , the petitioner cannot as a matter of right ask for revaluation of the answers. He referred to Regulation 39 (7) of the Chartered Accountants regulations, 1988, which is extracted at para 21 of the petition. The same reads as hereunder:" (7) In any case where it is found that the result of an examination has been affected by error, malpractice, fraud, improper conduct or other matter of whatever nature, the council shall have the power to amend such result in such manner as shall be in accordance with the true position and to make such declaration as the council shall consider necessary in that behalf: provided that no such amendment shall be made which adversely affects a candidate, without giving him an opportunity of being heard: provided further that in the event of an error not arising out of act or default of candidate, proceedings for amendment adversely affecting the candidate shall not be initiated after the expiry of a period of one month from the date of the declaration of result. " ( 6 ) THE petitioner relies on this regulation for demanding revaluation. This regulation has no bearing on the question of revaluation of answers given by the candidates at the examination. This regulation only provides that if the result of an examination has been affected by error, malpractice, fraud, improper conduct or other matter of such nature, the council shall have the power to 'amend' such result. This regulation does not give any right to the candidate who has appeared for the examination to demand revaluation of the answer papers. If, in fact, the integrity of the examination has been for any reason affected on account of leakage of questions or other malpractices, the regulation empowers the council to 'amend' the result of such an examination. ( 7 ) MR. If, in fact, the integrity of the examination has been for any reason affected on account of leakage of questions or other malpractices, the regulation empowers the council to 'amend' the result of such an examination. ( 7 ) MR. Naganand submitted that the entire scheme of the examination is such that there is no possibility of undervaluation of answer papers, since there is a Head examiner for each paper to supervise the valuation done by a large group of examiners. He also emphasised that in view of the fact that the final examination being a professional examination, exacting standards are set. Despite the fact that the petitioner had done extremely well throughout his academic career, unfortunately he has failed to make the grade in so far as this examination is concerned. ( 8 ) THE facts of academic life are such that of ten times the 'over performers' atcollegiate level, fail at other levels though their college record predict success. Conversely, there are many instances of 'late bloomers' who do exceedingly well at professional examinations, contradicting their previous collegiate performance. It would be presumptuous to hold an opinion, that a professional examination and valuation therein, are unreliable merely because a candidate who had done exceedingly well in the previous examinations, has come a cropper in the instant case. ( 9 ) THE at the preliminary hearingstage itself. --- *** --- .