Logo
2 min. Read
|Feb 3, 2026 4:35 PM

High Court Orders Wipro to Pay 6.3 Lakh Plus Interest to Ex-Staffer

Sahiba Sharma
By Sahiba Sharma
Company Logo
Advertisement

Karnataka High Court has ordered Wipro Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. to pay a long-pending ex-gratia amount to a former regional manager.

Presiding over the case, Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum dismissed Wipro’s appeal, imposing an additional penalty of ₹50,000 on the company for “abusing the process of law” and subjecting the employee to years of vexatious litigation.

The Dispute: A Promise Unmet

The case involves Ratnesh Pandey, a 51-year-old former employee who served Wipro for 12 years before resigning in August 2017.

Upon his departure, Wipro offered him an ex-gratia payment of ₹6.32 lakh, payable 18 months post-resignation.

This payment was contingent on three non-compete conditions: not soliciting Wipro employees, not disclosing internal details, and not joining specified competitors like Philips India or Bajaj Electricals.

Despite Ratnesh adhering to all conditions, Wipro refused to release the funds.

The company argued a “hyper-technical” point: that Ratnesh had not formally signed and returned the offer letter, claiming the offer had therefore “stood revoked” under the Indian Contract Act.

Court Rejects “Technical” Defenses by Wipro

The High Court upheld a previous 2024 civil court ruling, stating that the right to receive the ex-gratia was based on conduct, not a formal signature.

The judge noted that Wipro had already acted upon the resignation and never alleged any breach of the non-compete clauses.

Justice Shankar remarked that a corporate entity of Wipro’s stature is expected to act fairly.

He described the company’s resistance as an attempt to defeat a legitimate contractual claim through unjustified legal hurdles.

Final Verdict and Costs

The court directed Wipro to pay the original ₹6.32 lakh along with 10% annual interest effective from February 2019.

Furthermore, the ₹50,000 cost imposed by the High Court serves as a penalty for the “unjustified resistance” that forced the former employee through a prolonged legal battle.


Note: We are also on WhatsApp, LinkedIn, and YouTube to get the latest news updates. Subscribe to our Channels. WhatsApp– Click HereYouTube – Click Here, and LinkedIn– Click Here.