Enforcement Directorate
Special Director (Western Region) Vineet Agarwal (IPS:1991:MH) on 29 March 2019
passed an order, apparently, without consulting the ED headquarters. This was
apparently not relished by senior HQ officials and so in a matter of hours, the
order was canceled void ab initio.  Agarwal's canceled order
purportedly relieved Joint Director (WR-I) Satyabrat Kumar (IRS) of all the duties
except the supervision of the Coal Block Allocation case and made the
additional director (WR) responsible for everything else. Since this order was
issued without the approval of the ED chief, an order was immediately issued on
behalf of the latter by Rohit Anand, Deputy Director (Estt). It said that
Satyabrat Kumar will continue to look after the Mumbai Zonal Office-I till
further orders.  It is pointed that while
passing the canceled order, Agarwal cited the DOPT order (dated 01 March 2011)
which said “no extension in deputation beyond 5th year is allowed and deputationist
officer is deemed to have been relieved on the date of expiry of deputation
period unless the competent authority has with the requisite approvals,
extended the period of deputation, in writing, prior to the date of its
expiry.† Agarwal's canceled order
further quotes the DOPT order which said “it will be the responsibility of the
immediate superior officer to ensure that the deputationist does not overstay’.
Further citing the SC order (W.P.(CRL.) No. 120/12 on 27/11.2018) Spl Director
Agarwal writes that ‘Satyabrata Kumar, Joint Director shall continue to
supervise the investigation of Coal Block Case in MBZO-I and all other files
shall be directly marked from the concerned officers to additional Director
(WR) who shall look after the charge of MBZO-I till further orders from the
H.O.’  Clearly, Agarwal is seen
exceeding his brief in issuing the order without the approval of the ED chief. Â This episode appeared to
have a sort of semblance with the CBI faction feud which benefited none but
damaged the reputation of an institution. Â
Already, at the senior
level, everyone is talking about how the ED is pulled in a different direction
by the installation of certain officials representing certain political
interests. The latest case may be just the beginning of the conflict that
plagued the CBI earlier.
Two simultaneous orders signal CBI-like conflict in ED
By IndianMandarins - 2019-03-30 11:28:10
Enforcement Directorate Special Director (Western Region) Vineet Agarwal (IPS:1991:MH) on 29 March 2019 passed an order, apparently, without consulting the ED headquarters. This was apparently not relished by senior HQ officials and so in a matter of hours, the order was canceled void ab initio.Â
Â
Agarwal's canceled order purportedly relieved Joint Director (WR-I) Satyabrat Kumar (IRS) of all the duties except the supervision of the Coal Block Allocation case and made the additional director (WR) responsible for everything else.Â
Since this order was issued without the approval of the ED chief, an order was immediately issued on behalf of the latter by Rohit Anand, Deputy Director (Estt). It said that Satyabrat Kumar will continue to look after the Mumbai Zonal Office-I till further orders.Â
Â
It is pointed that while passing the canceled order, Agarwal cited the DOPT order (dated 01 March 2011) which said “no extension in deputation beyond 5th year is allowed and deputationist officer is deemed to have been relieved on the date of expiry of deputation period unless the competent authority has with the requisite approvals, extended the period of deputation, in writing, prior to the date of its expiry.â€
Â
Agarwal's canceled order further quotes the DOPT order which said “it will be the responsibility of the immediate superior officer to ensure that the deputationist does not overstay’. Further citing the SC order (W.P.(CRL.) No. 120/12 on 27/11.2018) Spl Director Agarwal writes that ‘Satyabrata Kumar, Joint Director shall continue to supervise the investigation of Coal Block Case in MBZO-I and all other files shall be directly marked from the concerned officers to additional Director (WR) who shall look after the charge of MBZO-I till further orders from the H.O.’
Â
Clearly, Agarwal is seen exceeding his brief in issuing the order without the approval of the ED chief.
Â
This episode appeared to have a sort of semblance with the CBI faction feud which benefited none but damaged the reputation of an institution.Â
Â
Already, at the senior level, everyone is talking about how the ED is pulled in a different direction by the installation of certain officials representing certain political interests. The latest case may be just the beginning of the conflict that plagued the CBI earlier.
