⚖️ Defamatory Termination Letter by Employer: What the Delhi HC Decided

The Delhi High Court has held that a defamatory termination letter by employer Wipro caused reputational injury, ordering ₹2 lakh in damages to ex-employee Abhijit Mishra. The Court emphasized that dismissals must be fact-based, not stigmatic, and respect professional dignity.

📜 Case Background: Defamation Suit Over Termination Letter

Detail	Description
Plaintiff	Abhijit Mishra, Principal Consultant at Wipro (2018–2020)
Defendant	Wipro Limited
Allegation	Termination letter contained defamatory remarks
Relief Sought	₹2.1 crore in damages + fresh termination letter
Court’s Finding	Remarks were unsubstantiated and defamatory

Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav observed that the letter’s language lacked factual support and harmed Mishra’s future employability.

🧑‍⚖️ Legal Reasoning: Why the Letter Was Defamatory

• No one submitted inquiry reports, warnings, or disciplinary records.
• Unsupported terms included “malicious conduct” and “irreparable breakdown.”
• The Court invoked the doctrine of compelled self-publication, noting that Mishra would be forced to share the letter with future employers

“The impugned termination letter, replete with stigmatic language and bereft of any foundation, constitutes actionable defamation,” the Court stated.

💰 Compensation and Directions

• ₹2 lakh awarded as general compensatory damages
• Wipro directed to issue a fresh termination letter without defamatory content
• Original letter deemed ineffective with respect to defamatory remarks

💬 Vakilify Insight

This ruling sets a precedent for employee dignity in termination communications. Employers must avoid stigmatic language unless backed by evidence. The Court’s recognition of compelled self-publication expands defamation liability in employment law.

🔗 Related Reading and Links

• 👉 Outbound: Indian Contract Act – India Code
• 👉 Outbound: Defamation Law Overview – Legislative Department
• 👉 Internal: Litigants Cannot Choose Judges: Kerala HC