New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday enforced the central strength to extend the term of office of the Director of the Enforcement Office outside the two-year period but explained that the ownership extension given to officers who had been carried out at retirement age must be carried out only in rare and extraordinary cases.
In a relief to the Director of Ed Sanjay Kumar Mishra, a one-year extension outside his retirement was challenged, the judicial of L Nageswara Rao and BR Gavai refused to cancel the government’s decision to extend the past November but directed that there was no further extension given to him.
“We must explain that the expansion of tenure given to officers who have reached retirement age must be carried out only in rare and extraordinary cases.
Reasonable extension period can be given to facilitate the ongoing probe settlement only after the reasons recorded by the committee are based on the following committee 25 (a) of the CVC Act, “Bench said.
“Any extension of the tenuriur given to the people who hold the Director of the Enforcement Director after reaching retirement must be for a short time.
We did not mean to disrupt the extension of the term of office of the second respondent (Mishra) in an instant case on the grounds that his tenure ended in November.
Clarifying that there was no further extension given to him, “it was said.
Enumerating Part 25 (d) The CVC Law, the bench said the term of office of the Director Ed could exceed two years because the provision said his term of office was at least two years.
Mishra was appointed as Director of Ed for two years in November 2018.
In November 2020, his tenure was replaced by three years.
Justifying the decision, the government said that the term of office was extended because many money laundering cases were at an important stage and changing guards could hamper probes and prosecution.
The Supreme Court allows the government to extend the term of education
