Can ED invoke Article 226? SC to decide if agency can file writ petitions

The Supreme Court will examine whether the Enforcement Directorate can invoke Article 226 to file writ petitions before High Courts, after appeals by Kerala and Tamil Nadu governments

The Supreme Court will examine whether the Enforcement Directorate (ED) is a juristic person with the right to file writ petitions before High Courts under Article 226 of the Constitution, Bar and Bench reported.

 

A Bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma issued notice to the ED while hearing appeals filed by the Kerala and Tamil Nadu governments. The appeals challenge a September 26, 2025 order of the Kerala High Court, which upheld the Enforcement Directorate’s right to file writ petitions under Article 226.

 

States challenge Kerala HC ruling

 

The Kerala High Court had upheld a stay on a judicial inquiry ordered by the state government to examine alleged attempts by central agencies, including the Enforcement Directorate and Customs, to falsely implicate Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan and other leaders in the UAE gold smuggling case.

 

The Division Bench of Justices Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Syam Kumar VM dismissed the state’s appeal against a 2021 interim order of a single judge, which had stayed the judicial inquiry.

 

The High Court observed that the commission of inquiry was only a fact-finding body. Allowing it to function alongside ongoing criminal proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) could potentially derail the course of justice, the news report said.

 

The single-judge's order had stayed the judicial inquiry commission set up in May 2021 under the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952. The commission, headed by retired Justice V K Mohanan, was formed to examine alleged jurisdictional overreach and political bias by central agencies, particularly the Enforcement Directorate.   

  ED moved court against state notification

 

The Enforcement Directorate later approached the Kerala High Court seeking to quash the state government’s notification constituting the commission. It argued that the move was malicious and violated principles of federalism.

 

Accepting this argument, the single judge stayed the notification. The Kerala government then challenged the order before the Division Bench but failed to get relief.

 

States question ED’s locus standi

 

Kerala argued that the Enforcement Directorate had no locus to file a writ petition and said any dispute between the Centre and the state should have been raised by the Union government under Article 131 of the Constitution, which grants exclusive jurisdiction to the apex court, the news report stated.

 

However, the ED maintained that matters under the PMLA and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) fall under central laws and are outside the state’s domain.

 

After hearing both sides, the High Court held that the Enforcement Directorate had the locus to file a writ petition and upheld the interim stay order on September 26 last year.

 

Tamil Nadu flags wider impact

 

In its appeal, Tamil Nadu said the Kerala High Court ruling could affect a mining-related case in the state, where the Enforcement Directorate has invoked writ jurisdiction and sought directions for registration of a case.

 

The state argued that disputes between the Centre or its agencies and a state can only be resolved by the Supreme Court under Article 131.

 

Tamil Nadu further said the ED is a department under the Ministry of Finance and not a separate statutory body. “Neither is the DoE a juristic person nor can it claim ‘enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III and for any other purpose’ which is the prerequisite for the issuance of a writ under Article 226 of the Constitution by the High Court,” the plea states.

 

Similar ED plea pending before SC

 

The top court is also hearing another petition filed by the ED under Article 32, seeking registration of a CBI case against West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee.

 

When the matter was heard on January 15, the West Bengal government opposed the plea, arguing that Article 32 is meant for citizens and not government agencies. Despite this, the Supreme Court issued notice to Mamata Banerjee.