Completion of recruitment rendered answer-key challenges infructuous where no interim orders had been granted.

The petitioners challenged answers to specified questions in a KPTCL recruitment examination and sought revised marks and fresh selection lists under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution

KPTCL stated that related petitions challenging the master answer keys had been dismissed in 2021 and had attained finality; it also submitted that the recruitment process was complete and the selection list had been notified

No interim orders had been made in these petitions.

Whether the petitions required adjudication after the recruitment process had concluded and the selection list had been notified

The petitions invoked Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution

The Court applied the procedural principle that a writ petition need not be adjudicated where subsequent events have rendered the requested relief infructuous

The relief sought—revising examination answers and marks, followed by reconsideration or publication of a selection list—was sought after the recruitment process had concluded and the selection list had been notified.

In the absence of interim orders, and given the dismissal of related challenges to the answer keys, the Court held that the petitions no longer called for adjudication in light of subsequent events

It disposed of both petitions as not calling for adjudication and rendered infructuous; any pending interlocutory applications were also disposed of