Daga had filed a writ petition against Union of India, state-run mutual fund UTI, and the three public sector bank shareholders of CDSLBank of Baroda, State Bank of India and Bank of Indiacontesting the termination of his services on the basis of ex-parte findings of an internal enquiry conducted at UTI in 2002.
These ex-parte findings denoted that it would seem to indicate that Daga had knowledge and understanding of the true purpose of the transaction between Calcutta Stock Exchange (CSE) and UTI in March 2001.
Daga had asserted in the writ petition that BoB, SBI, and BoI had moved the resolution to terminate his service contract with CDSL under the direction of and pressure brought on them and on Bombay Stock Exchange by the government of India and UTI directly and through capital market regulator Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi).
A division bench comprising Justice Bilal Nazki and Justice AP Bhangle, while delivering the judgment, has directed that the allegations leveled against the petitioner should not be considered to be a stigma of whatsoever nature to the petitioners career. The bench also noted Dagas contention that the statements made against him accord a stigma for him as he had put more than 40 years of unblemished service in financial sector.
Reacting to the court ruling, Daga said, The judgment has come as a great relief to me as my honour has been restored and I stand vindicated.