As West Bengal questioned the maintainability of the Enforcement Directorate’s petition under Article 32 of the Constitution over alleged obstruction by Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee during its raid at political consultancy firm I-PAC in Kolkata, the Supreme Court on Tuesday wondered if the ED officials could go to the state government in such a situation.”The CM barges into an ED investigation, and your idea of remedy for the ED is to go to the state government, which is headed by the CM and inform them about it and seek a remedy?” a Bench of Justice PK Mishra and Justice NV Anjaria asked senior advocate Kapil Sibal who represented the West Bengal government.The Bench – which had on March 18 said that Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee interrupting the probe agency’s January 8 raid at the I-PAC office in Kolkata was not a “happy situation” – made these comments on Tuesday after Sibal said that if the ED officials had been obstructed, the state police could investigate the matter.Sibal said the court should not assume that the Chief Minister has committed any offence.Contending that investigative agencies can’t claim a fundamental right to investigate, Sibal said allowing the ED to invoke writ jurisdiction under either Article 32 or 226 of the Constitution will open a “Pandora’s box”.However, the Bench posed a counter question to Sibal. “Just because they are officers of the ED, they cannot approach (SC) under Article 32? Suppose, there is no petition of the ED and there is only one petition filed by officers of the ED… What way will you deal with that? Merely because at that point of time they are officers of the ED do they cease to become citizens of India?” the Bench asked.“Please concentrate on the fundamental right of officers of the ED against whom the offence has been committed. Otherwise, you will miss the point. You can’t forget the second petition which is preferred by individual officers who are the victims of the offence. You will be in difficulty, I am telling you. Don’t just say ED, ED, ED,” Justice Mishra told Sibal and posted the matter for April 14.Senior advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Kalyan Bandopadhyay, representing the state DGP and the CM respectively, said the question of maintainability should be referred to a larger Bench as it involved an important question of law.