SHAILABEN M PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Jadeja, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Parikh, learned AGP for respondent No.1 - State. None for respondent No.2. Though served, no one has entered appearance for the respondent No.2.

(2.) In this petition, the petitioner has prayed, inter alia, that:-

(3.) At the outset, learned advocate for the petitioner clarified that though in present petition, the petitioner has raised claim for gratuity as well as leave encashment, subsequently (i.e. after submission of present petition), the respondent has paid the amount payable towards leave encashment and that therefore, the claim or dispute with regard to the petitioner's demand for payment of leave encashment does not survive and the only claim and dispute, which survives so far as present petition is concerned, is related to gratuity. Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the respondent No.2 has not paid any amount towards gratuity.