In the case of Dr Jaya Thakur v. Union of India and ors a group of petitions opposing the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) present director’s tenure extension. Mishra was initially named ED Director in November 2018 for a two-year term. November 2020 marked the end of this term. He would be 60 and be eligible for retirement in May of 2020.The President had altered the 2018 order to the effect that a time of “two years” was changed to a period of “three years,” according to an office order that the Central government published on November 13, 2020. The central government passed an ordinance modifying the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) Act in response to the court’s ruling in 2021, giving it the authority to increase the ED Director’s term by up to five years.The ED Director’s tenure may be extended by the Parliament for periods of up to five years. In a ruling from September 2021, the Supreme Court authorized the amendment but barred giving Mishra any further extensions. The NGO challenge the Supreme Court’s decision to extend of tenure ED.
Observation of the Court
The Supreme Court Bench of Justices BR Gavai, Vikram Nath, and Sanjay Karol affirms the correctness of its 2021 ruling, which permitted the extension of the Enforcement Directorate (ED), and thus the court issued a mandamus to prevent Mishra from having an extension beyond 2021. The Supreme Court Bench also reserved its judgement in a group of petitions contesting the extension of the tenure of the current ED Director.
The bench noted that an extension of the ED tenure duration is not necessary.It appears at prima facie instance that the Supreme Court’s ruling from 2021 has to be reconsidered. Further, the bench questioned the Central government regarding the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) standards or requirements that provide for continuous terms for the ED Director.