Today, the Governor of Kerala, Arif Mohamed Khan, addressed the accusation made by retired Justice Rohinton Nariman, who claimed that the Governor was not acting as an "independent functionary."

During a conversation with Prabhu Chawla at the ThinkEdu Conclave in Chennai, the governor asserted that Justice Rohinton Nariman had a potential conflict of interest on the matter.

The Governor pointed out that Justice Nariman's father, Senior Advocate Fali Sam Nariman, and his associates had received over ₹40 lakhs from the Kerala government for providing opinions on the same issue.

In a lecture delivered in Mumbai last month, Justice Nariman expressed his anticipation for a future in which the Supreme Court would affirm that only independent functionaries should occupy the positions of governors.

He specifically referenced the situation in Kerala, criticizing the current occupants and implying that they do not meet the criteria of being truly independent.

“The Advocate General of Kerala has requested the government, vide reference so and so…to sanction ₹ 30 lakh to be paid to Shri Fali S. Nariman, Senior Advocate of the Supreme Court, 9 lakh to Subhash Sharma his Junior, 4 Lakh to Shri Zafir Ahmed again his junior, and ₹3 lakh to Shri Vinod K Anand his clerk”, he read.

Furthermore, the Governor emphasized the apparent contradiction in the situation, noting, "The father is receiving the money, and the son is criticizing the Governor for preventing a scenario in which that opinion could benefit the Kerala government."

The Governor raised a pointed question, stating, "Sir, if a substantial amount is paid to someone in my family and I fail to disclose that fact while publicly criticizing someone, does it align with the principles of Natural Justice?"

In his December 2023 lecture, Justice Nariman highlighted the need for appointing independent individuals to the role of governors, citing the significant constitutional responsibilities they hold. He pointed out the discretionary powers governors have, such as giving assent to bills and reporting under Article 356 in case of a constitutional breakdown in the state.

Justice Nariman expressed concerns that if a governor is affiliated with a political party and appointed for reasons other than merit, it could compromise the independence of assessments under Article 356 and Article 200. He underscored that the current system concerning governors is riddled with challenges.