- (1.) Heard Sri Amit Jaiswal, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Sudeep Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.1 and Sri Ajay Kishore Pandey, learned counsel for opposite party no.2.
(2.) Facts, in brief, of the present case are that Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (herein after referred as ''Institute') is a statutory body created by an Act of Parliament viz the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred at ''Act'). Further , as per regulations which were framed by the Institute a person who has to become a Chartered Accountant has to enroll with the Institute and he has to clear compulsory paper in the Intermediate and final examination conducted by the Institute.
(3.) In the present case , writ petitioner/ Ashutosh Nigam appeared in the examination for the purpose of enrollment of Chartered Accountant conducted by the Institute. He was not successful in the said examination, so he approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No.5887(MS) of 2013 (Ashutosh Nigam Vs. Union of India, Ministry of Human Resources through Secretary and another) with the following main relief:- "(a) Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to evaluate/ re-evaluate the answer sheet of the petitioner for the corporate and allied Laws paper. (b) Issue, writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties produce the answer sheet of the petitioner of the corporate and Allied Laws Paper and to get them evaluated by some independent agency. (c) Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties to declare the petitioner as having passed in Corporate and Allied Laws paper for the final group examination, 2013. (d) Award costs in favour of the petitioner and against the opposite parties and to pass such further or other orders as may be considered just and proper in the interest of justice and in the circumstances of the case." After exchange of pleadings , the writ petition was allowed vide judgment and order dated 28.04.2014 which reads as under:- " Heard Shri Manish Mathur, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri Vibhu Shanker, learned counsel for respondent no. 2. ;