Prerna Gala
Published on: September 6, 2022 at 18:18 IST
ED Director Sanjay Kumar Mishra’s tenure extension is being contested in a lawsuit, and senior attorney KV Viswanathan has been named as an Amicus Curiae.
The Court mandated that an Advocate-on-Record assist the amicus and provide a succinct summary of the arguments made by the various parties involved in the case.
The Supreme Court named Senior Advocate KV Vishwanathan as Amicus Curiae in the case of Dr. Jaya Thakur and others vs. Union of India and Ors, which challenges the legality of the extension extended to the tenure of the current Director of Enforcement Directorate (ED) Sanjay Kumar Mishra.
After taking note of Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta’s argument that the Central government’s response would be served on the parties today, a Bench consisting of Chief Justice of India Uday Umesh Lalit and Justice S Ravindra Bhat scheduled the matter for September 12.
“Considering the issues raised, we appoint Senior Advocate KV Vishwanathan as amicus curiae to assist us in this case. The amicus shall be assisted by an AoR [advocate-on-record]. The AoR shall make a concise statement regarding the submissions by various parties and include relevant documents,” the Court directed
Last month, the Supreme Court requested the Central government’s response to a number of petitions that questioned its choice to extend Mishra’s employment.
At least 8 petitions contesting the tenure extension were being heard by the court from representatives of the TMC and the Congress, as well as Dr. Jaya Thakur, Randeep Singh Surjewala, Saket Gokhale, and Mahua Moitra.
The other petitioners are Manoharlal Sharma, Krishna Chander Singh, and Vineet Narain.
According to the petitioners, the top court’s September 2021 ruling against further extensions to Mishra’s tenure was violated by the Central government’s move to extend Mishra’s tenure.
Mishra was initially chosen as the ED Director in November 2018 for a two-year term. In November 2020, the two-year tenure came to an end. He would be 60 and be eligible for retirement in May of 2020.
On November 13, 2020, the Central Government, however, published an office order in which it was said that the President had modified the 2018 order, changing the time period from “two years” to “three years.”
The NGO, Common Cause, contested this before the Supreme Court. The Central government has the authority to make retroactive adjustments, but they should only be made in the most exceptional of circumstances, according to a September 2021 ruling by a bench of Justices L Nageswara Rao and BR Gavai.
Additionally, the Court had ruled that Mishra’s tenure, which was about to end, could not be prolonged.
Following the Supreme Court’s ruling from the previous year, the Central government passed an ordinance modifying the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) Act, giving it the authority to increase the ED Director’s term to a maximum of five years. This is currently being contested before the highest court.
At today’s session, SG Tushar Mehta argued that all but one of the pleas were an attempt by politicians to exert pressure.
“ … all PILs here are from political leaders and from those parties whose members are currenty being investigated by the ED, and thus this is not a bonafide PIL but is a pressure tactic,” he said.