Hi, you have to challenge your termination in appropriate authority and then move to court for your grievance.

if you have taken job in bank by material suppression of facts you can be dismissed from service . in present case you have used fake transfer certificate and taken admission in VIII std without passing 6th std . hence can be terminated as he lied about educational qualifications

you got job under false pretences period . hence services can be terminated

I think you can raise your issue in High Court and you may get relief if you are able to prove your case ,i would advise you to try and fail but do not fail to try,you never know you find your self in better place

resolve all disputes with your father . it does not make any sense in washing dirty linen in public . if fraud is discovered nationalised bank will terminate your services

for that you need to speak to your lawyer

1) i n Delhi Administration through its Chief Secretary and Ors. v. Sushil Kumar (supra); Supreme Court held: "3. It is seen that verification of the character and antecedents is one of the important criteria to test whether the selected candidate is suitable to a post under the State. Though he was found physically fit, passed the written test and interview and was provisionally selected, on account of his antecedent record, the appointing authority found it not desirable to appoint a person of such record as a Constable to the disciplined force. The view taken by the appointing authority in the background of the case cannot be said to be unwarranted. The Tribunal, therefore, was wholly unjustified in giving the direction for reconsideration of his case. Though he was discharged or acquitted of the criminal offences, the same has nothing to do with the question. What would be relevant is the conduct or character of the candidate to be appointed to a service and not the actual result thereof. If the actual result happened to be in a particular way, the law will take care of the consequences. The consideration relevant to the case is of the antecedents of the candidate. Appointing authority, therefore, has rightly focused this aspect and found it not desirable to appoint him to the service

2) n Union of India & Ors. Vs. M. Bhaskaran (supra), Supreme Court held: "Consequently, it has to be held that the respondents were guilty of misrepresentation and fraud perpetrated on the appellant- employer while getting employed in railway service and had snatched such employment which would not have been made available to them if they were not armed with such bogus and forged labourer service cards. xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx It was clearly a case of fraud on the appellant-employer. If once such fraud is detected, the appointment orders themselves which were found to be tainted and vitiated by fraud and acts of cheating on the part of employees, were liable to be recalled and were at least voidable at the option of the employer concerned.

thanks for your appreciation