THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.6936 OF 2010 Dated: 29.03.2010 Between: U.Subramanyam. .. Petitioner. And The Authority under Payment of Gratuity Act & Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Vikarabad, Ranga Reddy District and another. .. Respondents. ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Labour appearing for the 1st respondent, and at their request, the matter is taken up for hearing at the admission stage. The petitioner herein, who worked as Manager, Maintenance and Needle Operations, in the Company of the 2nd respondent, and retired voluntarily from service with effect from 21.04.2006, has filed an application, under the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, before the 1st respondent herein, against the 2nd respondent- Managing Director, Sangam Health Care Products, Ranga Reddy District, on 17.06.2008, claiming an amount of Rs.90,200/- towards gratuity. The said application was numbered as P.G.No.6 of 2009. However, in spite of service of notice, as the 2nd respondent did not appear, he was set ex parte, by order dated 07.05.2009. Thereupon, the 2nd respondent filed an application to set aside the ex parte order dated 07.05.2009, along with letter dated 26.02.2009 addressed to the 1st respondent, and the same is pending consideration. It is the grievance of the petitioner that despite the 2nd respondent admitting, in the letter dated 26.02.2009 addressed to the 1st respondent, that he is eligible to a tune of Rs.62,446/- towards gratuity, till date no final orders have been passed by the 1st respondent. From a perusal of the material papers filed along with the writ petition, prima facie, it appears that the petitioner has filed an application as early as on 17.06.2008, and no reason has been put forth by the 1st respondent in not disposing of the said application for such an unduly long time. However, it is not desirable for this Court to record any finding with regard to entitlement of any gratuity amount by the petitioner, as it is for the 1st respondent to consider and decide the same in the application, which is numbered as P.G.No.6 of 2009, filed by the petitioner. In view of the above and also that the application, which is numbered as P.G.No.6 of 2009, filed by the petitioner is pending consideration, I deem it appropriate to direct the 1st respondent to dispose of the said application as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above direction, the wit petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. __________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY,J 29.03.2010 v v