The managing director's approach to the problem can be seen as a way of trying to maintain the company's credibility and prevent employees from blackmailing the management. By accepting Mr$.$ Alok's resignation, the managing director is sending a message that the company is not willing to be held hostage by employees who threaten to quit if they don't get what they want. This approach can also be seen as a way of avoiding the potential damage to the company's business interests that could result from Mr$.$ Alok's departure.

It is difficult to say whether Mr$.$ Alok was trying to exploit his expertise or was genuinely aggrieved by the company's refusal to grant him the higher salary he requested. It is possible that he was simply trying to leverage his expertise to get a better deal from the company, or that he was genuinely unhappy with the company's decision and felt that he was being treated unfairly. Ultimately, it is up to the individual to decide what their motivations were.

One possible solution to this case could be for the company to offer Mr$.$ Alok a higher salary without the condition of serving for two more years. This would likely be a more attractive offer than the one previously made by the company, and would also avoid the potential damage to the company's reputation that could result from Mr$.$ Alok's departure. Additionally, the company could consider implementing a policy that prohibits employees from threatening to quit if they don't get what they want, in order to prevent similar situations from arising in the future. Final answer: The managing director's approach to the problem can be seen as a way of trying to maintain the company's credibility and prevent employees from blackmailing the management. One possible solution to this case could be for the company to offer Mr$.$ Alok a higher salary without the condition of serving for two more years.