Facts
The applicant, an in-service Police Constable, sought permission to apply online for recruitment as Sub-Inspector and an extension of the application-correction deadline. He said that, despite approaching the respondents’ help desk as instructed, he was not given login credentials and could not submit an online application.
Source reference: p. 2–5At the hearing, his counsel submitted that the matter had become infructuous and that nothing remained for adjudication.
Source reference: p. 6, para. 3Issues
1. Whether any live dispute or relief remained for adjudication after the applicant’s counsel submitted that the OA had become infructuous.
Source reference: p. 6, paras. 3–4Law Applied
The Tribunal applied no substantive statutory provision, legal doctrine, or precedent.
Source reference: p. 6, paras. 3–4It disposed of the OA on the basis of counsel’s submission that the matter had become infructuous, without adjudicating the merits of the requested relief.
Source reference: p. 6, paras. 3–4Reasoning
The applicant’s counsel expressly stated that nothing survived for adjudication.
Source reference: p. 6, paras. 3–4In light of that submission, the Tribunal did not examine the applicant’s eligibility, the provision of login credentials, or the requested extension of time, and closed the OA as infructuous.
Source reference: p. 6, paras. 3–4Holding
The Tribunal closed the OA as infructuous.
The Tribunal made no order as to costs.
Source reference: p. 6, para. 4Original Court PDF
P RavindranvsUT OF PUDUCHERRY
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
![Application Closed as Infructuous After Counsel Stated Nothing Survived for Adjudication. P Ravindran vs UT OF PUDUCHERRY. CAT - ['Chennai']. LawLens](/stories/thumbnails/application-closed-as-infructuous-after-counsel-stated-nothing-survived-for-adjudication-04d41922b1c842f39dc9935cbff50a1d.webp)