Supreme Court To Hear Plea Challenging Extension Of ED Director's Term On April 16

The Supreme Court will hear on April 16 the petition filed by Common Cause which challenges the extension given to the term of the Director of Enforcement Directorate Sanjay Kumar Mishra with retrospective effect.

On Monday, a bench comprising Justices L Nageswara Rao and Vineet Saran posted the matter for disposal on next Friday. Attorney General KK Venugopal told the bench that the reply to the petition is ready and is being filed today.

The petition challenges the order issued by the President on November 13 last year, which modified the 2018 appointment order of ED Director to increase his original term of appointment as 3 years instead of 2 years. ED Director SK Mishra's term was otherwise for a period of two years till November 18, 2020.

The petition has stated that according to provisions of the CVC Act, a Committee recommends the candidate to be appointed as the ED Director, to the Ministry of Finance. Such Director cannot be below the rank of Additional Secretary to the Central Government and he shall continue to hold office for a period of not less than two years.

The NGO has contended that after the end of Mishra's two-year tenure as the ED Director, he would have been ineligible for appointment to the said post again by virtue of Section 25 of the CVC Act.

It has been further contended that there is neither any enabling provision in the CVC Act for extension of service of the Director, Enforcement Directorate nor any enabling provision which provides for such retrospective modification of appointment orders.

"The impugned Office Order, dated 13.11.2020, issued by the Respondent No.1 is in the teeth of Section 25 of the CVC Act as the said Section provides that a person has to be above the rank of Additional Secretary to the Government of India to be eligible for appointment as a Director of Enforcement. Thus, as the Respondent No.2 has already reached his retirement age in May 2020, therefore, after the end of Respondent No.2's two-year period on 19.11.2020, the Respondent No.2, by virtue of not holding any post above the rank of Additional Secretary, would have been ineligible for appointment as a Director of Enforcement again," the plea states.

It is contended that the Government has employed a circuitous route in order to ensure that Mishra gets one more year as the ED Director and it is submitted, The plea has submitted that the intention behind Section 25 (d) in providing a minimum tenure of two years to the ED only to insulate the Director of Enforcement from all kinds of influences and pressures. However, the said purpose gets defeated if on the verge of his two-year tenure and much after his retirement age, the Director of Enforcement is given a de facto extension in service by adoption of a circuitous route of modifying the initial appointment order itself. TagsSupreme Court Common Cause Notice Issued Appointment Enforcement Directorate Director

During the admission hearing on February 25, , Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that according to the scheme of the act he shall have minimum tenure of 2 years. However, he was given a one year extension.

"This is destroying independence of ED, it has become means for harassment. " Bhushan had submitted.

"Mr. Bhushan we are impressed with the point you are making. We will hear you." the Bench had observed while issuing notice.