JUDGMENT (Per F. M. Reis, J) Heard Mr. Nigel Da Costa Frias, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. M. Salkar, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents. 2. Rule. Heard forthwith with the consent of the learned counsel. 3. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents waives service. 4. Upon hearing the learned counsel, the main grievance of the petitioner is that an application for extra ordinary leave is pending consideration before the respondent no.1 as according to the petitioner on account of an ailment of her son she requires such leave. On the last date of hearing, a grievance was raised by the learned Government Advocate that such application would not be examined unless the petitioner reports for duties to the concerned department. Accordingly, the petitioner has in fact reported for duties and is presently working with the concerned department. In such circumstances, we find it appropriate to direct the respondent no.1 to decide the said application dated 01.06.2015 preferably within two months in accordance with law. The petitioner if so advised is at liberty to produce additional documents in support of her application within one week. 5. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. The petition stands disposed of accordingly.