GAUTAM MEHTA Vs. BIKRAM SINGH AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 07.04.2016 passed by the Controlling Authority under subsection (4) of Section 7 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 despite the effective alternative remedy available under subsection (7) of Section 7 of the said Act. Similar writ petition was dismissed by this court in the case of Thai Airways International Public Company Ltd. Vs. Gurvinder Singh, (2018) LLR 390.

(2.) At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, submits that he does not press the writ petition and would avail of the alternative remedy as available under the law for which liberty may be granted.

(3.) In these circumstances, the writ petition and pending applications are dismissed as withdrawn with such liberty.