Dear, The employer has the right to decide on waivers and additional benefits, which can vary on a case-by-case basis. If I signed a contract with a company that has since changed its name, my bond is still valid. My point is that the company cannot avoid its obligations by changing its name. Unfortunately, neither of these points work in your favour, as I have been saying from the start that you need to negotiate with the current HRM (which may come at a cost, such as two months’ notice instead of one). However, since you have stated that “many have left the organisation without paying a rupee”, the HRM may be displeased and pass the issue on to your departmental head. There is still a chance, though. Since you have mentioned that the bond was signed at the time of offer, it can be seen as a criterion of selection. If after joining you discover such a binding, any court cannot enforce it. To simplify, an offer is as good as a sale of a catalogue (with *conditions apply). Once you join a company based on an offer letter, it is an acceptance of the offer letter and the joining itself is a contract. If a bond is issued after joining, it is useless and you should consult a lawyer. However, you will need to prove it.

The highest authority to issue letters lies with the Managing Director, who can assign this responsibility to different Executives. In some cases, this power is delegated through circulars. Although it is rare, some companies require Board resolutions for the issuance of appointment letters, when the MD has not been granted general power of attorney. This is mainly done for the sake of record-keeping and to ensure uniformity across the organization, with HR typically being responsible for the issuance of letters.