Can Employer claim expense for on-the-job training of 5 Lacs given for use of tools & instruments to perform service & get result. Clear terms mentioned in appointment letter are "employment bond" & bond of service. And not, contract of service, employment agreement, indemnity bond etc.
My Ex Employer Summoned me by lower court in Delhi to Pay for above training cost plus 2 Lacs of Loss suffered due to my leaving. In total Ex Employer asked me to pay them 7.11 Lacs for breaching 3 years of employment bond where my salary was 1.9Lacs PA. I resigned without Notice period of 30 days after 2 years 5 months while 7 months were remaining to finish bond. I was not given confirmation letter after 2 months of probation.
My Appointment Letter stated I can not join other co. nor can solicit clients of this co. for 2 years after I dont work here. Can they Penalize me our my new company. or can I do it as being self employed.
My hearing is on 17-Oct-2015. I stay in Goa.
Please Advice me at best to make my defense.
From India, Mumbai
My Ex Employer Summoned me by lower court in Delhi to Pay for above training cost plus 2 Lacs of Loss suffered due to my leaving. In total Ex Employer asked me to pay them 7.11 Lacs for breaching 3 years of employment bond where my salary was 1.9Lacs PA. I resigned without Notice period of 30 days after 2 years 5 months while 7 months were remaining to finish bond. I was not given confirmation letter after 2 months of probation.
My Appointment Letter stated I can not join other co. nor can solicit clients of this co. for 2 years after I dont work here. Can they Penalize me our my new company. or can I do it as being self employed.
My hearing is on 17-Oct-2015. I stay in Goa.
Please Advice me at best to make my defense.
From India, Mumbai
Hello Hitendra, In principle, Employment/Service Bonds that are a result of ANY provable Training ARE legal. Pl wait for the legal eagles in this Forum to respond with more details. Rgds, TS
From India, Hyderabad
1637From India, Hyderabad
This case can be handled by a professional advocate as you will need to defend yourself in court.
Points which can go in your favour;
The company cannot simply say Rs5L for training on the job-they will have to quantify the expenditure.
Was there any production output as a result of OJT.
Loss of 2 L by your leaving cannot in general be recovered from you.these losses are remote consequences and quantification is difficult.
How have they worked out 2L and attributed it to your exit??
Only 7 months was left for completion of bond period anyway.
If probation was not revoked,then what terms are there for a person on probation to exit?
Many such defences can come up.
Consult a good lawyer in Delhi and fix up terms of retainer ship,payment etc.
Collate all papers regarding your previous employment.
While a legal proceeding is always a troublesome matter,be bold and defend yourself taking proper legal advice.
The company is also in weak point in some places as i can see from your post.
From India, Pune
Points which can go in your favour;
The company cannot simply say Rs5L for training on the job-they will have to quantify the expenditure.
Was there any production output as a result of OJT.
Loss of 2 L by your leaving cannot in general be recovered from you.these losses are remote consequences and quantification is difficult.
How have they worked out 2L and attributed it to your exit??
Only 7 months was left for completion of bond period anyway.
If probation was not revoked,then what terms are there for a person on probation to exit?
Many such defences can come up.
Consult a good lawyer in Delhi and fix up terms of retainer ship,payment etc.
Collate all papers regarding your previous employment.
While a legal proceeding is always a troublesome matter,be bold and defend yourself taking proper legal advice.
The company is also in weak point in some places as i can see from your post.
From India, Pune
Hitendra,
Now saying that Organisation is demanding 7 lacs is in correct.
You have seen and accepted appointment letter, which had this clause, and you had option to refuse this and not join company.
You also say you didnt serve required notice period, which is also wrong and you knew you have one month notice period.
Now the question is amount of liquidated damages...
Organisation has power to file case whether legal or illegal that court will decide. But do you time to attend court, hire Lawyer and spend money?
I suggest, request your employer saying out of required 3 years of service you have served majority of the part. Hence they should waive off.
If not agreeing, ask them to proportionately charge.
Any way you have to pay for one month notice.
There also negotiate, request to waive off.
This is better way to part with any employer.
In future there will be past ref checks and if you need chit, better do this.
Or
If you dont agree, fight in court and may land up in spending same money on Lawyers, which is utter waste.
Mutual settlement is best way out in such cases.
Next time read your appointment letter properly before signing and accepting offer.
Good Luck !
From India, Mumbai
Now saying that Organisation is demanding 7 lacs is in correct.
You have seen and accepted appointment letter, which had this clause, and you had option to refuse this and not join company.
You also say you didnt serve required notice period, which is also wrong and you knew you have one month notice period.
Now the question is amount of liquidated damages...
Organisation has power to file case whether legal or illegal that court will decide. But do you time to attend court, hire Lawyer and spend money?
I suggest, request your employer saying out of required 3 years of service you have served majority of the part. Hence they should waive off.
If not agreeing, ask them to proportionately charge.
Any way you have to pay for one month notice.
There also negotiate, request to waive off.
This is better way to part with any employer.
In future there will be past ref checks and if you need chit, better do this.
Or
If you dont agree, fight in court and may land up in spending same money on Lawyers, which is utter waste.
Mutual settlement is best way out in such cases.
Next time read your appointment letter properly before signing and accepting offer.
Good Luck !
From India, Mumbai
Hello Hitendra,
Can you share your original appointment letter / employment contract and any other indemnity letter / agreement letter that you would have been issued (specify which of them have been acknowledged by you).
It's only fair to comment on the case by reviewing the document. You may mail it as pdf on
with your contact number to enable me to talk to you in case of queries.
Cheers,
A.B.
From India, Mumbai
Can you share your original appointment letter / employment contract and any other indemnity letter / agreement letter that you would have been issued (specify which of them have been acknowledged by you).
It's only fair to comment on the case by reviewing the document. You may mail it as pdf on
Cheers,
A.B.
From India, Mumbai
kanvij, nathrao Sir, Thank you very much for kind reply.
I worked here & Got Exact case-
http://indiankanoon.org/doc/90682699/
Co. Did provide direct instructions under supervisor so as to be able to deliver exact contents from training manuals to clients of co. Thus this was as core job role being trainer. The impart of training to its client is job role & supervisor was to assign job to me & also ensure quality of service.
The said Induction or Internal Training provided by Supervisor was to ensure quality of service while I delivering same instructions to clients. It didnt help cognitive development to me & neither could it be applied outside predefined environment of co. Nor I ever worked in real time application of concepts of instructional manuals. Hence, No Production output out of said direct instructions. Only responsibility was Delivery of Training instructions from the said manuals to clients.
Supervisor acknowledged multiple times that "following instructions from manual & getting same result in the predefined environment doesn't require any skills. Even 3 yr old daughter if could read english can do the same thing" Hence To same Job Special Privileged or Special Training Not required. Till Last day with Co. I never had those required certificates as qualification standard maintained by Microsoft to Impart Training. So as I was Job Less for last 4 months before joining & was Financially Not Sound, had No Bargaining Power in negotiation to any Ready Formats of Bond.
Thus all expenses are only towards salary. this is Business consideration & are already worked in Admin Expenses in supervisors & my salary. Nor did purchase of training manuals were for employees they were for clients we were provided its access only to deliver the exact instruction from manual & get same results from manual. Hence The Products which Co. is supposed to sell by means of imparting service, I stood as workman in performing service. which also is contradicting my position as Trainee which according to Apprentice Act says Trainee & Apprentice is meaning same & that Apprentice is Not Employee. But here I was on Pay roll of Co.
How can co. ask for money to what job instruction & job role they provided in pretext of wrong interpretation of word training which is Business of Co.
On reference to above cs no. Can you defend my case in same district court or if not then can you please provide your reference to the lawyer who willingly can help me here.
Do reply soon, as currently we are in Delhi searching helpful lawyer
With Best Regards,
Hitendra, Mob-08983009085
From India, Mumbai
I worked here & Got Exact case-
http://indiankanoon.org/doc/90682699/
Co. Did provide direct instructions under supervisor so as to be able to deliver exact contents from training manuals to clients of co. Thus this was as core job role being trainer. The impart of training to its client is job role & supervisor was to assign job to me & also ensure quality of service.
The said Induction or Internal Training provided by Supervisor was to ensure quality of service while I delivering same instructions to clients. It didnt help cognitive development to me & neither could it be applied outside predefined environment of co. Nor I ever worked in real time application of concepts of instructional manuals. Hence, No Production output out of said direct instructions. Only responsibility was Delivery of Training instructions from the said manuals to clients.
Supervisor acknowledged multiple times that "following instructions from manual & getting same result in the predefined environment doesn't require any skills. Even 3 yr old daughter if could read english can do the same thing" Hence To same Job Special Privileged or Special Training Not required. Till Last day with Co. I never had those required certificates as qualification standard maintained by Microsoft to Impart Training. So as I was Job Less for last 4 months before joining & was Financially Not Sound, had No Bargaining Power in negotiation to any Ready Formats of Bond.
Thus all expenses are only towards salary. this is Business consideration & are already worked in Admin Expenses in supervisors & my salary. Nor did purchase of training manuals were for employees they were for clients we were provided its access only to deliver the exact instruction from manual & get same results from manual. Hence The Products which Co. is supposed to sell by means of imparting service, I stood as workman in performing service. which also is contradicting my position as Trainee which according to Apprentice Act says Trainee & Apprentice is meaning same & that Apprentice is Not Employee. But here I was on Pay roll of Co.
How can co. ask for money to what job instruction & job role they provided in pretext of wrong interpretation of word training which is Business of Co.
On reference to above cs no. Can you defend my case in same district court or if not then can you please provide your reference to the lawyer who willingly can help me here.
Do reply soon, as currently we are in Delhi searching helpful lawyer
With Best Regards,
Hitendra, Mob-08983009085
From India, Mumbai
Sir, Thank you very much for kind reply.
I was working here & The Exact case is-
Cs no. 38/13/13 koenig solution v/ Kuldeep Singh on 17-9-14 http://indiankanoon.org/doc/90682699/
Co. Did provide direct instructions under supervisor so as to be able to deliver exact contents from training manuals to clients of co. Thus this was as core job role being trainer. The impart of training to its client is job role & supervisor was to assign job to me &
also ensure quality of service.
It was not for my cognitive development & neither could it be applied outside predefined environment of co. Nor I ever worked in real time application of concepts of instructional manuals. Only responsibility was Delivery of Training instructions from the said manuals
to clients.
Supervisor acknowledged multiple times that "following instructions from manual & getting same result in the predefined environment doesnt require any skills. Even 3 yr old daughter if could read english can do the same thing" So No Special Skills were required to To
Follow Instructions from Manuals & show the same result in the predefined environment.
Thus all expenses are only towards salary. this is Business consideration & are already worked in Admin Expenses in supervisors & my salary. Nor did purchase of training manuals were for employees they were for clients we were provided its access only to deliver the
exact instruction from manual & get same results from manual.
How can co. ask for money to what job instruction & job role they provided in pretext of wrong interpretation of word training. More over I was Employed as Trainee having same Responsibilities as Other Permanent Employees. According to Apprenticeship Act Trainee can not
be workman.
On reference to above cs no. Can any one defend my case in same district court or if not then can you please provide reference of the lawyer who willingly can help me here.
Do reply soon, as currently we are in Delhi searching helpful lawyer
With Best Regards,
Hitendra, Mob-08983009085
From India, Mumbai
I was working here & The Exact case is-
Cs no. 38/13/13 koenig solution v/ Kuldeep Singh on 17-9-14 http://indiankanoon.org/doc/90682699/
Co. Did provide direct instructions under supervisor so as to be able to deliver exact contents from training manuals to clients of co. Thus this was as core job role being trainer. The impart of training to its client is job role & supervisor was to assign job to me &
also ensure quality of service.
It was not for my cognitive development & neither could it be applied outside predefined environment of co. Nor I ever worked in real time application of concepts of instructional manuals. Only responsibility was Delivery of Training instructions from the said manuals
to clients.
Supervisor acknowledged multiple times that "following instructions from manual & getting same result in the predefined environment doesnt require any skills. Even 3 yr old daughter if could read english can do the same thing" So No Special Skills were required to To
Follow Instructions from Manuals & show the same result in the predefined environment.
Thus all expenses are only towards salary. this is Business consideration & are already worked in Admin Expenses in supervisors & my salary. Nor did purchase of training manuals were for employees they were for clients we were provided its access only to deliver the
exact instruction from manual & get same results from manual.
How can co. ask for money to what job instruction & job role they provided in pretext of wrong interpretation of word training. More over I was Employed as Trainee having same Responsibilities as Other Permanent Employees. According to Apprenticeship Act Trainee can not
be workman.
On reference to above cs no. Can any one defend my case in same district court or if not then can you please provide reference of the lawyer who willingly can help me here.
Do reply soon, as currently we are in Delhi searching helpful lawyer
With Best Regards,
Hitendra, Mob-08983009085
From India, Mumbai
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.
Employer-employ ee_866.jpg
Employer-PF-res trict to wages of Rs 6500.pdf