I am in urgent need for advice. 
I resigned on 24th of a month, requesting to be relieved by 28th of subsequent month. Five days after my notice, I received an acceptance of resignation, stating short notice pay will be recovered. This was when I got alarmed and checked my old appointment letter, only to find that the required notice period is 2 months. I had clearly overlooked it.
Immediately I sent out another letter stating that I had by oversight requested to be relieved in 1 month, and that the request stands cancelled, and that, I now request to allow me to serve full notice of 2 months.
The next shocker came soon, referring to all three previous correspondences, i.e. Resignation Letter, Acceptance of Resignation and My Letter Requesting to allow me serve full notice. It states:
"As per Clause No. xxxx of Company Personnel Manual related to the matter of relieving of employee prior to completion of full notice period following resignation, you will be relieved from the services of the company with effect from closing hours of 9th Feb 2018 and your balance notice period has been waived off by the management."
HR referred me to the said clause which states that company can dispense with services of employee serving notice after resignation, before completion of notice, with no salary or compensation payable to employee for remaining notice period.
Such arbitrary clauses and manuals notwithstanding, my appointment letter has no reference to such a situation as mine, except that "You may tender resignation with two months' notice or notice pay in lieu. Failing your serving two months' notice AND failing your payment of notice pay in lieu, such amounts shall be deducted from monies payable."
My appointment letter has one clause: "You will be governed by the framework of the company's policies, circulars and instructions which will be binding on you in addition to the terms of this appointment letter."
Question: Does the law protect me on this matter that if the company has shortened my notice AFTER my resignation, they can afford NOT to pay me for the balance of notice period, just because their company manual says so? 
I would be glad to have good advice and soon.

From India, Ghaziabad

The caveat clause : "You will be governed by the framework of the company's policies, circulars and instructions which will be binding on you in addition to the terms of this appointment letter." is very crucial and is an inhibiting factor against your claim for observance of notice period as per offer of appointment. The accepted position is that offer of appointment cannot be exhaustive of all the terms and conditions of service and the company's policies, circulars and instructions will also be binding. But here there is a pertinent question that such company's policies, circulars and instructions have to brought to the knowledge of the employees before it is made mandatory. As per your version they were not circulated among employees and it remained only in files. This is a point of fact and has to be proved by evidence. There is a point of caution, it is presumed that all official acts are done in the proper way and it is for the party alleging it to be not so to prove it to be otherwise. So the proof that the rules were not in knowledge of employees is to be proved by you, not an easy task. You can evaluate your chances on the basis of the above said legal position.
From India, Mumbai
Dear friend,
How can you expect " good advice " from others when you've omitted to furnish the nature of your job i.e., whether it is managerial or supervisory with more than a salary of Rs.10000/=p.m or an employee belonging to workman cadre?
Coming to the point of acceptance of your resignation, whoever you are, by the employer after altering the notice period according to his discretion is quite illegal. The company manual may be a Holy Scripture to a HR without any legal bent of mind like the person you mentioned. In terms of substance and notification it can not run counter to the legal provisions of the Law governing the contract of employment and legal norms laid down by case laws. When the employee submits a resignation effective from a future date together with his willingness to serve the notice period of mistaken duration and the management accepts it with a modification of recovery of salary for the short notice period, it is correct to the extent of reality of the facts. But realizing his mistake, when the employee submits a fresh offer of serving the actual notice period, the employer has to comply with it since the resignation has not yet become effective. Even his refusal may be justifiable on the ground of alternative arrangement, if any made by the employer. But, he can not relieve him before the date mentioned by the employee and accepted by him for it amounts to a counter offer by the employer which requires the acceptance of the employee. Therefore, the employer has to pay the salary for the period of notice modified at his own discretion not withstanding any condition in his manual. In some other thread, I had mentioned the case laws in this regard. Please search and find.

From India, Salem
Dear Sirs
I am a senior management professional with 30 years of private sector experience.
Your advice is valuable.
About the legal provisions that you mentioned as having posted elsewhere in this forum, should I be able to find using your username?
Again, many thanks.

From India, Ghaziabad
Yes. pl see my contributions or appreciations received summary.
From India, Salem

What Mr Umakanthan has written is absolutely correct. HR manual cannot run counter to basic law. Offer,counter offer has not been understood properly by the HR.
From India, Pune

About Us Advertise Contact Us
Privacy Policy Disclaimer Terms Of Service

All rights reserved @ 2021 Cite.Co™