Is It Fair for HR to Ask for Proof of Notice Period from Three Years Ago?

I am currently working with IND bank and have been confirmed. Three years ago, I was working with AX bank and, without serving the notice period, I left the bank and paid the whole amount to the bank for the shortfall of the notice period. The bank issued me a letter for the same. I then joined Y bank where I worked and left after serving the proper notice period.

Today, HR called me and asked why I did not serve the notice period at AX bank three years ago. Is it valid for the bank's HR to ask for proof after such a long time? I had mentioned my family issues as the reason for leaving without notice, and now they are requesting a discharge certificate. It's interesting to note that during this time, I have worked with Y bank, and they did not inquire about the same.

It seems to be a complicated case. Normally, BGV will be completed before confirmation and I am not sure why your HR is asking for some clarification on your previous employment now. However, your full and final settlement sheets can explain the payment of the notice period, etc. So, talk to HR with those papers and show confidence.

You can talk to your HR and explain to them about your clearance and full and final payment in lieu of the notice period. This is completely correct if it is mentioned in your appointment letter and your former company has already accepted the same. Thus, you need not worry, and you can go ahead and discuss this with HR.