Latest news with #AbhijitMishra
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
17-07-2025
- Business
- First Post
Delhi HC pulls up Wipro: What a company can't say in employee's dismissal letter
The Delhi High Court has rapped Wipro for remarks against the professional character of an employee in his termination letter. Abhijit Mishra, who had worked as a principal consultant at the company, filed a defamation suit and sought over Rs 2.10 crore in compensatory damages. But what did the IT major say in the pink slip? read more Wipro has been asked to pay compensatory damages to its former employee. Representational Image/Reuters Can employers use harsh language against an employee in a termination letter? The Delhi High Court has come down heavily on IT major Wipro Limited for remarks against the professional character of a former employee in his dismissal letter. The court has asked the company to pay compensation to the man and issue a fresh termination letter. The ex-employee had filed a defamation suit and sought damages of over Rs 2.10 crore. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Let's take a closer look. What did Wipro say in the pink slip? Abhijit Mishra worked as a principal consultant at Wipro between 2018-2020. In his termination letter, the company used phrases like 'malicious conduct' and 'complete loss of trust.' He then moved the Delhi High Court against Wipro and sought compensation. Delhi High Court pulls up Wipro The Delhi High Court has ordered Wipro to pay Rs 2 lakh in compensatory damages to Mishra over the termination letter that it said was replete with 'stigma and insinuations.' Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav asked Wipro to expunge defamatory remarks made against the professional character of its ex-employee. 'Further, a fresh termination letter shall be issued to the plaintiff devoid of any defamatory content, and consequently, the impugned termination letter shall cease to be of any effect insofar as the defamatory content is concerned,' the Delhi High Court said, as per LiveLaw. The court found that Wipro's termination letter contained unsubstantiated negative remarks against Mishra. 'The remarks therein, couched in the use of the term 'malicious conduct', not only lack substantiation but also have a direct and deleterious impact on the future employability and professional dignity of the plaintiff,' the judge noted. Ruling in favour of the ex-employee, the High Court said that there was a 'clear mismatch' between the comments in the dismissal letter and consistent positive feedback in several official documents. The court observed that the remarks were 'demonstrably false and defamatory in nature' and that Wipro did not establish a valid defence. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD ALSO READ: Why Karnataka is probing mass layoffs at Infosys It asked Wipro to pay compensation to Mishra 'to redress the reputational harm, emotional hardship, and loss of professional credibility'. Justice Kaurav said that the tenor of the communication reflected a noticeable 'intent to carry out a form of character assassination by Wipro under the semblance of administrative formality, thereby compounding the damage to Mishra's reputation and standing,' as per an Economic Times (ET) report. The Delhi High Court also interpreted the doctrine of 'compelled self-publication' in matters related to defamation, ruling that 'employers cannot evade liability' under defamation law by using 'confidential correspondence as a shield'. Justice Kaurav said about the doctrine, 'It ensures that employers cannot evade liability by using confidential correspondence as a shield when, in substance, their actions set in motion the very harm the law seeks to redress.' He concluded that the defamation law cannot allow reputational harm, arising out of unsupported claims, to continue, especially when it significantly impacts a person's career and prospects, reported LiveLaw. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD What did Wipro argue in court? Wipro had argued before the High Court that Mishra, who worked in a senior, creative, and managerial position that required highly creative and original work, focused more on his self-styled identity as a 'crusader for social change,' rather than his professional duties, as per the ET report. The company claimed Mishra's behaviour showed his 'lack of interest' in improving his professional performance, which ultimately resulted in his termination. With inputs from agencies
Time of India
16-07-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Delhi HC orders Wipro to pay Rs 2 lakh for defaming former employee in exit letter
Academy Empower your mind, elevate your skills In a rare case, the Delhi High Court has held IT major Wipro Ltd in defamation over its termination letter to its former employee that was replete with 'stigma and insinuations.'It asked the company to pay Rs 2 lakh as general compensatory damages to Abhijit Mishra, who was working as principal consultant between 2018-2020, 'to redress the reputational harm , emotional hardship, and loss of professional credibility' occasioned by Wipro's that the letter was full of stigmatic language and bereft of any foundation, Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav asked Wipro to expunge remarks regarding the professional character of its former employee and issue a fresh termination letter to him."The remarks therein, couched in the use of the term 'malicious conduct', not only lack substantiation but also have a direct and deleterious impact on the future employability and professional dignity of the plaintiff," said the judge termination letter issued by Wipro did not merely effectuate the cessation of the employment relationship, but was couched in a language intended to tarnish Mishra's reputation and to impair his ability to pursue re-employment with dignity, the order tenor of the communication reveals a discernible intent to carry out a form of character assassination by Wipro under the semblance of administrative formality, thereby compounding the damage to Mishra's reputation and standing, Justice Kaurav has failed to place on record any credible evidence, either testimonial or documentary, to establish that the reputational harm suffered by Mishra was predicated on any demonstrable act of misconduct, the court had argued that Mishra, who was employed at a senior, creative, and managerial position that demanded highly creative and original work, instead of focusing on his professional duties was more invested in his self-styled identity as a 'crusader for social change,' engaging in activities unrelated to his behaviour demonstrated his lack of interest in improving his professional performance, which ultimately led to his termination, the company order came on a defamation suit filed by Mishra claiming damages of over Rs 2.10 crore for the adverse remarks in his termination letter that had a deleterious impact on his professional reputation, rendering him unable to secure any alternative employment.
