Have objective standards for opt-out scheme: SC tells ICAI

The opt-out scheme was announced by ICAI for candidates, who either tested positive or had family members infected by the virus on or after June 21

The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) to consider in its “opt-out” scheme the plight of those candidates, who have recovered from Covid-19 but are unable to take the examination due to the “horrible” after-effects of the disease.

The Supreme Court. (HT archive)

The opt-out scheme was announced by ICAI for candidates, who either tested positive or had family members infected by the virus on or after June 21. The candidates are required to produce RT-PCR positive in support of the “opt-out” claim to be allowed to take the exam in the November 2021 examination cycle.

Hearing a set of three petitions challenging the ICAI decision to conduct examinations in July during the pandemic, a three-judge bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari and Aniruddha Bose said, “When you allow opt-out scheme, it must be for good reasons based on objective standards.”

The bench said that the RT-PCR report alone cannot be the sole basis of determination for opt-out as in many cases the report is negative, but the person shows symptoms of the disease. “You have to identify a competent authority who will certify whether a candidate is incapable of appearing or was disabled to prepare due to the after-effects or Covid-19 situation at home.”

Two of the judges, Justice Khanwilkar and Justice Maheshwari, who recovered from Covid-19, recounted their experience. “We may not be experts but have personal experience of Covid-19. Fatigue is a big factor. It is horrible. Even after recovering from Covid-19, for three weeks we were unable to work or concentrate. You cannot expect CA students to prepare for the exams under these conditions.”

The bench sought ICAI’s response on a host of other suggestions given by the petitioners. These included the choice of change of examination centres, Covid-19 testing facility for teachers, invigilators ahead of the examination, maintaining the exclusivity of examination halls (not to be used for any other purpose), and arranging transport facility till the centres. The ICAI was given a day for filing its response. The court will take up the matter on Wednesday.

Later in the day, the ICAI submitted a short note in the Supreme Court agreeing to extend the opt-out scheme to those candidates who are yet to recover from COVID-19 after-effects. This will be in addition to the requirement for candidates to produce RT-PCR positive reports of their own or any member in their family.

The ICAI said, “The opt-out option shall also be extended to those candidates (whether under the Old or New Syllabus) who have recently suffered from COVID-19 or yet to recover from the after-effects of the COVID-19 and consequently unable to appear in the Examinations.” Such candidates will have to produce a Medical Certificate issued by a Registered Medical Practitioner stating that the candidate has recently suffered from COVID-19 and is yet to recover.

This Certificate could also be issued by District Medical Officer, Primary Health Centres, Government General Hospitals, Private Hospitals too. Further, the ICAI note stated that in the event of an inter-city change of examination centre at the last minute, candidates will get the option to opt out. No opt-out option will be given if the change is within the same city. The institute has also refused to provide transportation facilities or vaccination to candidates.

Nearly 3,74,000 students are scheduled to appear for the chartered accountancy (CA) examinations in July.

Rights activist Anubha Shrivastava Sahai and several students’ have challenged the ICAI’s decision to hold the examination.

Senior advocate Ramji Srinivasan, appearing for ICAI, submitted the Chief Medical Officer of each district can be asked to give a certificate of fitness to candidates.

The bench asked ICAI if candidates, who fall sick during the examination, would be given a chance to appear in the remaining papers in the November cycle of examinations.

The bench noted ICAI has been holding the examination for 74 years. “The issue we are considering is limited to opting out scheme, and the situation in which opt-out is to be permitted...”

Senior advocate Meenakshi Arora, appearing for some of the petitioners, requested the court for maintaining the exclusivity of examination centres. She said last year, some of the examination centres were used for marriage parties. “We cannot afford to turn any examination into a super spreader and expose examinees to infection,” Arora said. She suggested that invigilators should be allowed in the examination centre on the production of RT-PCR negative reports.

The petitioners argued for mandatory vaccination of candidates, accommodation facilities near examination centres. “Logistics is the responsibility of candidates. The institute can take responsibility for the examination hall,” the bench said. The judges did not wish to interfere with the vaccination policy as it was unconnected with the holding of the examination.