Facing Termination After Failing Confirmation Test at XXX Bank: Is This Fair?

My Experience with the Confirmation Test at XXX Bank of India

I joined XXX Bank of India as a Probationary Officer in November 2016. As per the terms and conditions of XXX Bank of India, a Probationary Officer had to qualify for a confirmation test (written test) to get confirmed into the services. The test is arranged by the end of the two years of probation. XXX used to give two attempts to qualify for that exam. The first exam took place on September 30, 2018. The result of that test was declared at the end of November 2018, and I was unable to pass that exam. Therefore, XXX provided me with another opportunity to sit for the confirmation exam, which was held on February 24, 2019, but I was unsuccessful in qualifying on the second attempt.

Concerns About Fairness and Career Impact

I entered the bank through a legitimate channel and am now facing termination based on my results in the confirmation exam. I feel that I am being denied the principle of natural justice. If others can be confirmed as officers without any examination, why should we have to go through the screening process twice (once during recruitment and later for confirmation)? Being over the age of 30, it seems that almost all opportunities are now closed for me.

In 2018, inside the bank, people are being promoted directly to scale 2 and 3 without any written exam or interview. How fair is this? What should I do?

If there is a term and condition mentioned in the appointment letter or rule book, you are to adhere to it. For the promotion of the officer, it may be the organizational policy; apart from a probationary officer and a confirmed employee cannot be placed at par. When talking about natural justice, please remember that SBI provided two chances to secure your confirmation; it is itself a form of natural justice.

Challenge to Termination and Recruitment Policy

I want to challenge the process of termination and the policy of recruitment, which, according to me, is unfair. My points are as follows:

1. Training, which was supposed to be given, was not adhered to. Almost 40 percent of the training was not provided to us. We have concrete proof of this. When we were not given proper training, these exams should be null and void.

2. In the offer letter and advertisement, it's written that confirmation will be subject to satisfactory branch performance and marks in the written examination. However, they have not given any importance to branch performance. Our branch performance is fair enough since we have never received any memo or official warning from the branch manager.

Please guide me on how to proceed, and what are my chances of winning the case if I file...

You may challenge the termination policy. Collect the branch performance report since you joined. May process for writ for policy is against the public policy. If there is a provision to provide training before the exam, it has to be completed.

The exit of an employee cannot depend only on qualifying the exam, especially when the performance of the branch is also a qualifying factor.