Gita Mittal, J.

1. The present writ petition has been filed by the writ petitioner contending that in exercise of powers conferred by sub-rule (i) of Rule 5 of Order IV of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, the Supreme Court has framed regulations for conducting the examination for being placed as Advocate on Record (“AOR” hereafter). It is contended that these regulations do not contain any provision for rectifying errors, if any, occurring after evaluation of the answer sheets by examiners; that they do not provide for any standard method for evaluation of the answer sheets as is followed in various national and state level examinations (for instance, examinations conducted by the Union Public Service Commission or State Public Service Commission) and as such they are arbitrary, unjust, unfair, unreasonable, inequitable and violative of Articles 14 of the Constitution of India. It is further contended that with regard to the AOR Examination, 2016 in which the petitioner participated, the respondents were required to get re-evaluated the answer sheets of Paper-I (Practice & Procedure of the Supreme Court) as well as Paper-III (Advocacy & Professional Ethics) by a Senior Advoc