MUMBAI, Oct. 30 -- The Bombay high court has dismissed a petition filed by a former senior vice-president of the National Stock Exchange (NSE) and observed that an employee who accepted the terms of his employment and the full and final settlement from his employer "cannot turn around and challenge the order of the letter of his disengagement from service". The court was hearing a petition filed by Suprabhat Lala, who had challenged his termination order of July 24, 2023, calling it "illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and discriminatory" and in violation of his constitutional rights. Lala, who joined the NSE in 2001 as a manager and rose through its ranks, faced a Securities Exchange Board of India (SEBI) inquiry in 2018 for allegedly leaking confidential information to his wife, who was a director in another company. A bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Manjusha Deshpande stated in its judgment of October 16 that the National Stock Exchange of India Limited (NSEIL) intended to establish a Liquidity Index System (LIS), and a contract was signed by NSEIL for the development of LIS with the company in which Lala's wife was a director. "This is the allegation by the SEBI that the petitioner (Lala) and others conspired and utilised the confidential data of the NSEIL during the development process," the judges noted, adding that his sharing of confidential information with his wife was a serious breach of confidentiality, which compromised the securities market integrity. With regard to Lala's claim that his fundamental rights were violated, the NSE stated that according to the conditions in Lala's appointment letter, it reserved the right to terminate his employment by giving three months' notice or pay in lieu of that. Lala was issued a cheque of Rs.21.50 lakh on July 20, 2023 as three months' salary, and on August 9, 2023, he endorsed a receipt of full and final settlement after receiving gratuity of Rs.50.09 lakh. Lala moved the high court in its writ jurisdiction. Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, a high court can issue orders or directions to a a public authority for the enforcement of fundamental rights. The NSE, however, argued that the nature of Lala's dispute with it was purely contractual and could not be raised in a writ petition. The bench said there was no question of any violation of Lala's constitutional rights. "Merely because the activity of the NSE has been held to be of a public character, the same is not a guiding factor to entertain this writ petition," it remarked....