Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
HARISANKAR V.MENON
Devadas S/o. Kumaran – Appellant
Versus
Kochi Metro Rail Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
HARISANKAR V. MENON, J.
The petitioner, who joined the service of the 1st respondent herein with effect from 22.08.2016 as a Maintainer (Electrical), points out that he had executed a bond assuring that he would serve the 1st respondent for a minimum period of three years after joining the service, as above. The petitioner states that, later, he got an employment with the Kerala Public Works Department (PWD) under the State of Kerala and therefore resigned from the service of the 1st respondent on the basis of an advice memo received from the Kerala Public Service Commission on 14.09.2017. Thus, the petitioner admits that he had not put in service for the bond period with the 1st respondent herein.
2. The petitioner, in such circumstances, has filed the captioned writ petition seeking a direction to the 1st respondent not to enforce the bond amount in the afore circumstances.
3. I have heard Sri.P.Jayaram, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Antony Mukkath, learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent herein.
4. The facts are not in dispute. The petitioner had executed a bond with the 1st respondent herein, as noticed earlier. The petitioner was to serve the 1st res
An employee changing jobs under a bond must obtain permission and execute a fresh bond with the new employer per applicable regulations.
Employment bonds are enforceable if they reflect reasonable conditions and training investments, but enhancements made retrospectively without consent are not legally sustainable.
A unilateral bond does not grant enforceable rights for continued employment; the ESIC can reduce bond terms without obligation to retain the bound personnel.
Prior appointment conditions are void following new appointments under updated rules, and enforcement of such bonds is deemed irrational and unlawful.
The court underscored the limited grounds for review under CPC while asserting that non-compliance with precedent does not constitute sufficient reason for appeal.
Employment bonds can be void if they impose unreasonable restrictions, are coercive, or violate public policy, especially considering the unequal bargaining power between employers and employees.
The Tribunal determined that prior notice of outside employment, made before joining DMRC, allows for the transfer of service bonds as per applicable Office Memoranda.
Parties are bound by the terms of the service bond, and the obligation to serve in the hilly region for the specified period cannot be modified. The concept of equality does not exist in the negative....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
