Hello Drishya,
Umakanthan has mentioned a very valid aspect of HR Policies and Practices.
Of late, HR professionals tend to mix up the implementation of an existing policy and the crux/spirit behind its framing. Too often, corporations begin to behave like government departments—going by the rules rather than focusing on the spirit of the policies and adapting along the way. I am not sure what the company would have expected to gain by insisting this employee serve the full notice period—unless the handing-over process is expected to last the full two months (in which case, fixing the notice period at two months wasn't right in the first place—some buffer is always added when fixing the notice period to cater to unforeseen situations).
To add to what Umakanthan mentioned about the way to handle this issue, please note that you are not dealing with just this case here. The company is sending out a clear message to the rest of the employees on how to handle their resignations if and when that time comes. When you wish to follow the rules rigidly, then the employees are also prone to follow the rule book rigidly, many times to the detriment of the company—case in point, attendance timings.
To give you an example of the case of a candidate last week whom we placed with one of our clients: this candidate's present company has the practice of holding the salaries—including the current month—of anyone resigning until the person is relieved (notice period is two months). So he wanted to resign after getting the present month's salary on 1 or 2 November 2021. Legally or technically, the guy may be right—but he too doesn't relish doing it. But the company left him no choice due to their short-sighted policies. The guy needs to support his family, and so he found out a shortcut to ensure he is not affected much—it's a pity that the company doesn't recognize this simple fact of life.
When the company thinks just for itself—through the various policies and practices—how can one blame the employee for thinking about themselves first and foremost? Do you think this person will show any serious interest in whatever period he would still be spending in this company? And except for ensuring that the HR policy has been followed to the hilt, what else does the company hope to achieve?
Suggest designing HR policies that result in a win-win situation/solution for all the stakeholders. Else, it's only a matter of 'when' than 'if' when situations can become nasty the way your case seems to have developed into—going legal may not be the right way in all scenarios. In this very case, my guess is that the company may have to spend much more on legal/advocate fees than it's saved now. Penny-wise, pound-foolish probably?
Also, in a single line, you have ensured that the brand image of your company doesn't get a high score in various social media portals if this guy decides to share his experience with the world.
All the Best.
Regards,
TS