The Kerala High Court on Monday instructed the state government to investigate the credentials of Navas A, the petitioner who filed a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging the appointment of former Finance Minister Dr. Thomas Isaac as an advisor to the Kerala Knowledge Economy Mission (KKEM).
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice S Manu directed the state counsel to examine the additional affidavit submitted by the petitioner and present a detailed report.
The Bench noted that the affidavit simply mentioned the petitioner’s occupation as a driver and his role as an RTI activist without providing any substantive information about his education, employment history, or qualifications.
"The least that is expected is that the PIL litigant must understand what is written in the petition and the intricacies thereon," the Bench remarked.
The Court further questioned the grounds on which the petitioner had challenged the government’s actions. It observed orally that such public interest litigations lacked merit and should not be entertained.
"It is time to prevent the filing of such public interest litigations," the Court said yesterday while directing the government to conduct a thorough inquiry on the identity of the petitioner.
The petitioner, Navas A, has challenged the appointment of Dr. Thomas Isaac as an advisor to the Kerala Knowledge Economy Mission (KKEM), which operates under the 'Vijnana Keralam' initiative. Navas has called for the Court to annul the government order appointing Isaac, describing it as arbitrary and illegal.
In his petition, Navas highlighted that the Kerala Development and Innovation Strategic Council (K-DISC), under which KKEM functions, is a registered charitable society aimed at boosting employment opportunities and promoting socio-economic development in Kerala. However, he alleged that the government issued a notification appointing Isaac as an advisor under a non-existent department, namely the 'Planning and Economic Affairs (Development and Innovation) Department.' The petitioner argued that only the 'Planning and Economic Affairs Department' exists, not the one mentioned in the government order dated December 12, 2024.
Furthermore, Navas accused the government of improper financial allocations in relation to Isaac’s appointment, including the allocation of ₹70,000 per month for fuel charges and driver expenses. He contended that this misuse of public funds exemplified nepotism and favoritism.
"It is a clear example of nepotism and favouritism. More than Lakh rupees are spent every month for an advisor for a post under an imaginary department and project. It is a great loss for the Government exchequer," stated the plea.
The petitioner further argued that the appointment of Isaac as an advisor was made without the requisite consultation with the Finance Department, a procedure that is mandatory when public funds are involved.
The plea was filed through Advocate Akhil Suseendran.
[Navas A v State of Kerala & Ors].
Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy