ED v. TASMAC: Madras High Court irked by State approaching Supreme Court "behind its back"

The Madras High Court on Tuesday expressed anguish that the Tamil Nadu government seems to have gone "behind the Court's back" in filing a plea before the Supreme Court to transfer the Enforcement Directorate vs. TASMAC case, out of the High Court. .A Bench of Justices SM Subramaniam and K Rajasekar had earlier posted the case for final hearing on April 8 (today) and April 9 after all parties agreed to these dates. When the matter was taken up today, the Bench was informed that the State has filed a transfer petition before the Supreme Court. The High Court questioned why this information was not conveyed to the Bench before the case was passed over earlier in the day. The Bench also pointed out that the case had been adjourned till today with the consent of all parties - after the State and the TASMAC (Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation) sought time to respond to the ED's counter. "What happened here in last hearing? ... It is with your consent it is listed here ... You are agreeing for final hearing in High Court but behind the back you are filing something in Supreme Court ... Even today morning, you have not informed you filed something in Supreme Court. What prevented you from adopting fairness in the High Court?" Justice Subramaniam asked the counsel representing the petitioners (State and TASMAC)..Cases are lined up in this Bench. We are struggling to find time ... We gave you time ... Why you are insulting the High Court?Madras High Court.The judge clarified that it is the State's prerogative if it wishes to approach the Supreme Court. However, he also expressed anguish that the petitioners were not being fair to the Madras High Court, particularly when time was specifically allotted to finally hear the matter this week. "Cases are lined up in this Bench. We are struggling to find time ... We gave you time.. Why you are insulting the High Court? ... You are unfair to the Court proceedings! You are disrespecting. Nothing prevents you from filing petition in Supreme Court. (But) what prevented you from informing the Court? ... You requested for five days time (to reply to counter). Is it not misrepresentation? Suddenly you are saying you filed transfer petition," he said. The development also led Justice Subramaniam to question whether the petition by the State was filed for genuine reasons. "Why you have filed this writ petition? Government filed this writ petition in public interest for interest of few TASMAC officials? ... Whether this writ petition is for the benefit of the public or some TASMAC officials?" Justice Subramaniam remarked. .Whether this writ petition is for the benefit of the public or some TASMAC officials?Madras High Court.The petitioners' counsel, meanwhile, urged the Bench to adjourn the case till April 9, since the transfer petition is slated to be taken up by the Supreme Court today. The High Court, however, expressed that it was not inclined to adjourn the case and passed over the matter till 2.15 PM today. Justice Subramaniam asked the petitioners' counsel to honour their commitment to argue before the High Court. "Why should we wait? Unless there is a stay order ... We will wait up to 2.15 and we will continue at 2.15. Passed over," the judge said. .The case concerns ED raids conducted from March 6 to March 8 at the premises of TASMAC, the State-run liquor distributor in Tamil Nadu. The ED has alleged that there are financial irregularities amounting to over ₹1,000 crore in TASMAC's operations, citing issues such as tender manipulations, unaccounted cash transactions and overpricing at retail outlets.On the other hand, the State government and TASMAC have accused the ED of exceeding its authority by barging into TASMAC's premises without the State's consent and detaining TASMAC officials for over 60 hours under the guise of investigation. Both the State and TASMAC have filed petitions in the matter before the Madras High Court. A Bench of Justices MS Ramesh and N Senthilkumar initially heard the matter on March 20, but eventually recused from hearing it further. Subsequently, the matter came up before a Bench of Justices Subramaniam and Rajasekar on April 1, which issued notice and said it would hear the case on April 8 and April 9. However, earlier this week, the State approached the Supreme Court urging it to hear the case instead since other matters that involve similar concerns about the ED's powers are already pending before the top court. The Supreme Court is slated to hear this matter later today. .[Read Live Coverage in High Court]