In a noteworthy development, a whopping Rs 61 lakhs have already been expended solely on legal advice concerning the government’s move to approach the Supreme Court against the Governor’s stance of not signing bills approved by the Assembly.
The legal counsel sought in this matter came from Fali S Nariman and KK Venugopal, both eminent and senior lawyers practising in the Supreme Court. As the legal proceedings have entered their initial stages, the financial toll on the government is expected to escalate substantially. The trajectory of the case suggests that the final cost to the state exchequer could run into crores by the time the legal battle concludes.
The conflict revolves around the Governor’s refusal to endorse certain bills passed by the Kerala Assembly. To contest this decision, the state government engaged the services of renowned legal experts, leading to substantial expenditures for legal advice alone.
Critics argue that the considerable financial resources allocated to legal battles could have been better utilised for public welfare initiatives and development projects. The ongoing legal confrontation underscores the complex interplay between the executive and constitutional authorities in the state, fueling concerns about the economic impact on the state’s finances.
Reports suggest that Fali S. Nariman was paid Rs 30 lakhs for legal advice. Former Attorney General KK Venugopal is going to argue the case against the Governor, on behalf of the Pinarayi Vijayan government. According to reports, RTI information suggests that Rs 15 lakhs have been paid to the prominent lawyer for the case discussion and for obtaining oral legal advice. Invoice for appearing in the court can be expected later.
Subhash Sharma and Lasafeer Ahmmed, juniors of Fali. S. Nariman, were reportedly paid Rs 9.90 lakhs and Rs 4 lakhs respectively. And, clerk Vinod. K. Anand was paid Rs 3 lakhs.
The aforementioned information have been reportedly obtained through RTI pertaining to the application filed by MK Haridas, president of Proper Channel.
The same state government has been lamenting about the serious fiscal condition the state undergoes. And, government does not take any sort of initiative to put an end to the confrontationist attitude towards the Governor. The ongoing SFI protests against the Governor is a clear indication of the attitude of the Pinarayi regime.
As the legal proceedings unfold, both the Pinarayi Vijayan-led government and Governor Arif Mohammed Khan find themselves embroiled in a dispute with broader implications, not just in legal terms but also in terms of fiscal responsibility and resource allocation for the overall welfare of the citizens.
