The petitioner, despite being a member of the third respondent, cannot seek relief under Article 226 due to lack of locus standi and must pursue remedies under the Trade Marks Act for trademark infringement.

1. The petitioner seeks for a mandamus directing the first respondent to strictly comply with S.2(2) of Cost and Works Accountants Act 1959 as amended and desist from encroaching into the domains earmarked for the third respondent (Chartered Accountants) and further direct the second respondent to ensure that the acronym ICOAI be used instead of acronym ICAI which belongs to the third respondent.

2. The case of the petitioner is as follows:

The petitioner is a practising Chartered Accountant and the member of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, the third respondent herein, for the past 30 years. The third respondent is a public authority established by the Chartered Accountants Act , 1949. The third respondent is identified with the acronym ICAI.

b) The first respondent is a public authority established under Cost and Works Accountants Act , 1959 and it is known with acronym ICWAI. The curriculum, methodology of practical training, the testing of theoretical concepts, etc., make the Chartered Accountancy course, toughest in the world, whereas the first respondent conducts the course more like distance education similar to B.Com. and M.com. Even though the first respondent was established with prime objective of promoting cost accounting, the past acts clearly establish that the first respondent is more interested in encroaching into the domain earmarked for the third respondent. The first respondent got an amendment to change its name in the year 2012 as Institute of Cost Accountant of India. Thus, to use the name of ICAI, which will create lot of confusion among the stakeholders. The first respondent is fully aware that their members are not equipped at all because of lack of practical training compared to the members of the third respondent. The first respondent changed their website from ICWAI to ICAI and started representing themselves as ICAI in all its communication with print and electronic media, blatantly misrepresenting to the stake holders by using the acronym ICAI. The repeated malicious acts of the first respondent during the past few years is creating lot of confusion in the minds of the stakeholders viz., the Government, Public Sector Undertakings, Industries, the public at large and the students in particular. Therefore, the present writ petition is filed with the relief as stated supra.

3. The first respondent filed a counter affidavit, wherein it is stated as follows:

a) The first respondent had never consented or in principle agreed to the proposal of the petitioner, before this Court on 13.07.2017 with regard to the change in the nomenclature. Consequently, any observation made by this Court based on the representation made by the learned counsel for the first respondent was without any instruction by the first respondent in writing. The first respondent had not given any intimation or instruction to that effect. The representation of the third respondent was suitably replied by the first respondent.

b) The first respondent was established in 1944 as a registered Company under the Companies Act, 1913. On 28.05.1959, the first respondent was given statutory recognition by a Special Act of Parliament viz., the Cost and Works Accountants Act , 1959. Thus, the first respondent is a statutorily recognised professional body for the regulation of the profession of cost and management accountancy.

c) The members of the first respondent had requested for a change of name of the Institute from Institute of Cost and Works Accountants of India to Institute of Cost and Management Accountant of India. From 1971, the first respondent had sent several repr