Retention bonus not payment


Hi,

I was given retention bonus letter by company as I was part of special project for the company, the retention bonus letter pont was that I should be employed till 31st march 2018. But on 6th March 2018 managment asked me to tender my resigination. This was done to save the retention bonus. what is the recource I have.

 
Reply   
 
FIN

Do you have irrefutable evidence of demand of resignation ( adio/visual/witnessed/minuted)?

Did you resign with immediate effect?

Or tendered notice period?

Has the resignationn been accepted?

 

 
Reply   
 



No I do not have audio, video. The process was witnessed by HR guy and functional head. I was asked to write my resignation letter and handed over resignation acceptance pre printed and signed immediately. The resignation was with immediate effect.

 
Reply   
 
FIN

Apparently you have not agitated after the meeting narrating the episode and that resignation was extracted by force in premises of the company and you signed under duress.

Was there any clause on arbitration in contract of employment?

Was there any remark on performance on record?

The establishment might have adjusted notice pay also in FnF statement since you signed resignation with immediate effect.

Has the establishment provided FnF statement and that is also accepted by you?

If yes now after app. 2.5 months on what grounds you are contemplating to agitate.

You are silent on IT.

If you have alredy consulted LOCAL counsels then what is their opinion after examining all docs,record and inputs.

 
Reply   
 
FIN

A resignation that is not given voluntarily is forced resignation.

On the face of IT looking into dates mentioned by you this is visible that an employee may not want to lose the benefits by resigning with immediate effect.

If you could not agitate so far then IT might be that you were threatened with adverse comments in BGV/reference check.

Since you are inclined to explore the possibilities approach your own very able senior LOCAL counsel of unshakable repute and integrity specializing in Labor/service matters and having successful track record ….. and worth his/her salt …and discuss in person to understand the strategy of your counsels and merits and proceed in best of your interest.. ASAP.

For such counsels; Check at LOCAL Labor Court/CGIT, Controlling Authority of Gratuity, School-Educational Tribunal, CAT, Civil Courts, HC,SC……..

If possible and workable try if employer agrees to waive off the notice pay (if deducted) and agrees to pay some amounts to you from  say retention bonus and close the matter.

 
Reply   
 
FIN

To pick up relevant points and ascertain how matter is viewed by courts you may go thru;

 

Bombay High Court

Janata Janardan Shikshan Sanstha ... vs Vasant P. Satpute (Dr.) on 7 January, 1986

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/661457/

Bombay High Court

Udgir vs Mahesh Shikshan Prasarak on 28 August, 2009

Bench: S. S. Shinde

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1835760/

Bombay High Court

Laffans India Pvt. Ltd. vs Pancham Singh Rawat And Anr. on 30 August, 2002

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/399687/

Allahabad High Court

Oriental Bank Of Commerce And ... vs S.M. Chopra on 12 October, 1999

fact that the plaintiff-respondent was coerced or forced to submit resignation against his free will are concurrent findings ... below have categorically held that the alleged facts stand provedwhich clearly make out an act of coercion

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1692200/

 

Delhi District Court

Sh. Rajesh Prasad vs Bharti Airtel Ltd on 24 February, 2016

 

(i) Now, during cross examination, PW1 has admitted that "It is correct that since my performance dipped I was once again given rating of A­4 for the period 31.03.2010. Vol. However, before making the final assessment no assessment alert or notification was issued to me". Thus, admittedly, the performance of plaintiff was below th expectations.

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/142501229/

 

 
Reply   
 
FIN

And from other perspective; while courts agree that resignation was force resignation..

Delhi District Court

Id No. 340/11 Munni Lal vs . M/S Uso International Pvt. Ltd. ... on 11 August, 2014

24 Further on perusal of resignation letter, I found that same is computerized typed letter and bears signature of workman. In the said letter it is written that "he will not go to labour court and will not file any complaint against USO office or General Secretary." Thus it is evident that contents of letters has been drafted by management official and workman singed under duress otherwise why he would written that he would not approach to labour court or file complaint against official of management. On perusal of the WS and testimony of MW2 also it is evident that workman if at all given resignation then same ID No. 340/11 Munni Lal Vs. M/s USO International Pvt. Ltd. Page No. 22 out of 28 was given due to threat of criminal action to be taken against him. I do not see the act of workman knocking the door of Ms. Alleyamma Jain was such an heinous act that workman would voluntarily resigned from service. Therefore even if workman was pressurized to resign under the pretext of taking criminal action against him exercising of said pressure was itself illegal. Hence in these circumstances on the face itself it can be said that workman resignation was not volunteered. Hence, I held he was terminated illegally by management in violation of provision of section 25F I.D. Act. Issue no.2 decided against the management.

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/116619499/

Delhi District Court

Mr. Mohit Chaurasia vs M/S. Hotspot Retails Limited on 31 July, 2012

 

29.It is also relevant to know that DW­1 has, in his cross­ examination, revealed that during February, 2009, 5 to 6 employees used to resign every day. The large number of employees resigning from the company also suggests that there were external factors which had propelled the employees to resign.

 

36.Moreover, the letter dated 17.02.09 Ex. PW1/D adds strengths to the version of the plaintiff that he was forced to resign under threat of forfeiture of emoluments. Had the plaintiff voluntarily resigned and with immediate effect, the plaintiff would not be entitled to even basic salary for three months and the defendant would not have undertaken to pay the same. The very fact that the defendant no. 2 has been willing to pay basic salary for three months indicates that the plaintiff had not voluntarily resigned but had been forced to tender his resignation. From the above, it is clear that the plaintiff had been compelled to resign. Hence, the defendant no. 2 ought to pay to the plaintiff his gross salary for the notice period i.e. three months.

62.The plaintiff has prayed for performance linked incentive for his performance during a period of one year prior to the termination of employment. The basis of this claim is the satisfactory performance of the plaintiff.

67.It has also been noted above that the plaintiff had not voluntarily resigned but have been forced to resign. 

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/96740901/

Karnataka High Court

Rajesh Korat vs Management Innoviti Embedded on 21 April, 2017

 

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/57380638/

 

 
Reply   
 
 

LEAVE A REPLY


    

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  



 

  Search Forum








×

Menu

Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query
Forensics & Evidence     |    x