Facing "Restricted" on My Full and Final Settlement: Should I Take Legal Action?

Issue with Full and Final Settlement

I worked with a well-known company for almost 1.2 years. I wanted to leave the organization due to joining another company and did not serve the required notice period of three months. I tried contacting HR and my superiors through writing and calling, but received no response. Finally, I left the organization after handing over all my responsibilities to my superior and informing them of my last working date. I wanted to compensate for the shortened notice period, but received no response. Now, I have received my Full and Final settlement (FNF) and service certificate, but it states "reason for separation - restricted." Can you suggest what I should do? I am considering filing a case against the company.

Thank you.

Regards

It seems you have no realization of your mistakes or don't even want to accept them. You know that you left your job without serving the notice period, which is a violation of the employment rules that you agreed to at the time of joining. You were expecting them to reply to you regarding your unprofessional and unethical behavior.

It is better to move on by accepting your mistakes and promising yourself to learn from your present situation, ensuring not to repeat the same in the future if you truly wish to have a successful career in the industry. There is no place for unprofessional and immature behavior like yours.

Lastly, you have done nothing right that can help you in your case if you decide to take legal action against your employer.

Sometimes opportunities for employees do not wait for three months. The employee did not abscond but repeatedly informed management in writing of his resignation with effect from a specific date, and he was ready to pay for the broken period of notice. Can an employer compel one to work despite this? No. They can at most call for compensating it by paying the notice period. Even the court cannot issue an injunction against him to work for three months.

Legally speaking, even a three-month notice period was contrary to the Shops and Establishment Act. If we further look into his designation and duties, he may be a workman. If that is the case, the notice period could not have been more than one month. In the eyes of the law, after the expiry of the notice period as per law, he shall be deemed to have been relieved. Thus, having rendered more service than the legally prescribed notice period, he can assert for a clean relieving certificate instead of a restricted one. If the employee goes to court, the insistence of the employer for a three-month notice will be held invalid as contrary to these statutory provisions. The employer should rather enter into terms that are legally valid.

What is the Remedy?

He can request the employer to revise the relieving certificate, failing which approach the inspector under the Shops and Establishment Act or, if he is a workman, then approach the Labour Commissioner. What if the notice period prescribed was six months, would the employee have adhered to that period and then only thought of quitting? By that time, the next employer would not have waited for him.

Thanks,

Sushil

I strongly disagree with the views expressed by Mr. Anil. If the person has resigned via an official channel, then the "reason for separation" cannot be labeled as "Restricted."

If 'jobseakar' has proof that he was willing to pay for the notice period, and HR did not respond in time, "as agreed in the contract" with their discretion, then the organization should accept the payment with goodwill and let the employee go with a clean record. It is not the employee who is mistaken here, but the organization and their HR department.

Many times HR behaves like they 'own' the employees. This is the indication where HR stops responding to any communication from the employee in such cases. Is it not outright rude to not even respond to official communication from an employee?

The morality of any organization depends much more on the morality of the HR department, even more than the management itself. It is very unfortunate that we find people around and even on this forum supporting such foul practices.

Hopefully, people like 'jobseaker' may fight up to their strength and try to bring change towards the betterment of employment. I express my best wishes for that.

Best Regards,
Amod.

Legal Recourse for Unfair Treatment

The company has been unfair in its dealings. The very fact that your superior has taken over your duties is an indication that the company has agreed to your exiting the company. I hope you have copies of letters written to the company about your desire to leave.

To get a clean relieving certificate, I would suggest that you send a legal notice to the company. Though our legal processes are time-consuming, and you should normally be busy in your career and not in legal battles, after reading what you have stated, it appears that the legal way is the only recourse left. The company may change its mind after receiving a proper legal notice with facts, arguments, and relief clearly spelled out, and could resolve the matter before it reaches a court of law.

Well, your reaction made me feel like you have experienced such situations in the past, which prompted your response, Mr. Amod. It seems you couldn't fully understand her query, but I appreciate your and others' responses.

Kindly answer the following with your best understanding:

1) Did she resign properly according to the agreed T&Cs, and did she receive acceptance of it?

- If it was rejected, she must have received a reply because it is unlikely that the employer wouldn't respond, whether it was in her favor or not. This is missing from her query.

2) She mentioned that she left the company by giving a COMPLETE HANDOVER to her superior. How was this possible?

- If the employer was not ready to relieve her, and
- If her superior was not replying or supporting her request to leave early without serving the notice period, how was she able to complete the handover formalities?

3) Do you think the seniors and superiors were intentionally harassing her and enjoying her situation, yet were not ready to relieve her? Or are they foolish for not wanting her to leave on her terms, even though she was ready to compensate the employer's loss? Just think about it.

4) Do you think the employer has that much time to waste on such employees?

5) And suddenly she received her F&F and a service certificate. How?

- This is against the rules and is an unprofessional act because, due to the ongoing issue and lack of response from her HR department, she shouldn't have been able to get them.

It is common to accuse employers easily of such things, but employees and their well-wishers often do not understand the employer's perspective. Employees can make mistakes, and people like you believe that employees are always right and can't do anything wrong, which leads to strict actions by employers.

If the employer really wanted to bother her, as she expressed, she wouldn't have received her F&F and certificate so easily. She would have had to go through a long process to get justice. However, she received her F&F and a service certificate, which shows how much the employer supported her and understood the situation.

Regards.

Resignation and Notice Period Compliance

Having given the notice of resignation and repeatedly informing the employer, even being ready to pay the shortfall of the notice period, an employee cannot be forced to work beyond the agreed terms. This is especially true if the terms are contrary to the Shops and Establishment Act or, in the case of a workman, contrary to Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act. Such a term of the contract is illegal, and it is not a question of whether the employee "resigned properly or according to the agreed T&Cs and having the acceptance of it."

After the employee has tendered the resignation, the onus is on the employer to reject the resignation if any disciplinary action is contemplated. The handing over or taking over must be done by the employer within the statutory notice period. If the employee absconds with any articles of the employer, they are liable for prosecution under Section 406 IPC.

There are numerous threads on this site where harassment of women employees by even ex-employers is noted, with threats to spoil their future by giving wrong feedback. Ultimately, the court must examine the legality of issues based on statutory provisions only. The following extracts from Apex Court decisions will clarify the doubts:

Supreme Court of India Decisions

Delhi Transport Corporation vs D.T.C. Mazdoor Congress on 4 September, 1990

“Under and as a part of the said Act, model standing orders are set out, and Standing Order No. 13 provides for simple termination of employment by giving one month's notice, etc. Similarly, there are provisions under various Shops and Establishments Acts of different States providing for the termination of employment of a permanent employee after giving one month's notice or pay in lieu of notice. Attention of this Court was invited to s. 30 of Delhi Shops and Establishments Act.”

N.S. Giri vs The Corporation Of City Of ... on 14 May, 1999

“As regards sick leave and casual leave, however, the position is that Section 22 fixed a maximum of 12 days total leave for sickness or casual leave with full wages. We do not see how this peremptory direction of the Legislature can be disregarded by a Tribunal.”

Thanks

Sushil

Dear Jobseeker,

Your query has generated heat in addition to shedding some light. As a non-HR person, I am unclear on how you managed your contractual obligations. What kind of job were you performing at the company, and how much notice did you provide in writing? I am curious why you continued to call and write to HR without visiting them. Is there no HR personnel on-site but only at the headquarters? If you were able to hand over your responsibilities to your superior, what was his/her response to your resignation?

Thank you.

I completely agree with you, Amod. I have a similar problem. Please help me.

Request for Assistance from Seniors

Dear seniors, please help me out. I worked in a company for more than a year in a different state. Due to my father's health, I was supposed to go back to my native place (state). My previous employer did not accept that, and we had a small conflict. After a discussion, they mentioned that the HR manager would provide me with a relieving letter. Later, I discovered that I was terminated from the company. When I approached them for the experience letter and the relieving letter, they refused to provide any such documents. That cunning manager has disrupted my life. Now, after a long period of struggle and hard work, I am about to join a new company in my hometown or state.

Concerns About Previous Employment Details

My question is, as I had a previous PF account linked to my PAN card by my previous company, will there be any issue if my new company creates a new salary account in the same bank? Will they be able to find out my previous employment details using the PAN card or PF account details? If so, can I close that PF account or opt for a new PAN card? Is there an alternative to resolve this issue? I do not want my current employer to be aware of my previous company's details.

When I submit my PAN card details and they try to open a new PF account, will they discover that I already had a PF account linked to my PAN card? If so, how can I address this problem? Can I change my PAN card or close it to get a new one? How can I close the PF account? What about my bank account? Should I close it? Please help me. This answer may assist me in advancing my career. I would be very grateful to anyone who could help me navigate this issue. I want to prevent my current employer from accessing my previous company's details through my bank account or PF account. How can I prevent this from happening? A prompt response or answer would be highly appreciated. Thank you in advance. I am eagerly waiting for your reply.