Kerala High Court Quashes State Govt Order For Nava Kerala Citizens Response Programme'
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday allowed the public interest litigation challenging the State government's 'Nava Kerala Citizens Response Programme' which commenced on January 01.The Division Bench of Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. passed the verdict.The plea had alleged that the survey is a politically motivated exercise intended to benefit the ruling Left Democratic...
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday allowed the public interest litigation challenging the State government's 'Nava Kerala Citizens Response Programme' which commenced on January 01.
The Division Bench of Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. passed the verdict.
The plea had alleged that the survey is a politically motivated exercise intended to benefit the ruling Left Democratic Front (LDF) ahead of the upcoming Assembly elections and amounts to a misuse of public funds and government machinery.
The Court heard detailed arguments adduced by the counsel for the petitioner and the Advocate General last week.
The petitioner had argued that the funds earmarked for public projects were being utilised for political purposes, flouting financial rules. Certain media reports were relied upon.
Reliance was also placed on a letter dated 23 September 2025, which the petitioner claimed was issued by the Secretary of Communist Party of India (Marxist) [CPI(M)], Kerala State Committee. It was argued that the said letter had influenced the subsequent Cabinet decision to form a voluntary organisation accommodating supporters of the LDF.
At the time, the High Court had asked that the Secretary of CPI(M), who allegedly issued the letter, be made a party in the proceedings. Subsequently, it heard the case in detail and had then reserved its verdict.
Violation Of Rules Of Business
The Court held that the programme's objectives, including collection of development suggestions, evaluation of welfare schemes and planning future initiatives, fell within the domain of the Planning and Economic Affairs Department or the Programme Implementation, Evaluation and Monitoring Department.
However, the government had designated the Information and Public Relations Department as the nodal agency and authorised it to utilise ₹20 crore under the “Special PR Campaign” head.
The Bench found that this allocation was contrary to the Rules of Business framed under Article 166(3) of the Constitution and could not be justified by Cabinet approval or administrative sanction.
It held that compliance with the Rules of Business is mandatory, particularly where public finances are involved, and that the allocation amounted to a colourable exercise of executive power.
Financial Irregularities Noted
The Court also found deficiencies in the budgetary process. It noted that only about ₹4.6 crore had originally been allocated to the department under the Special PR Campaign head, while the programme involved an additional expenditure of around ₹14 crore.
The Bench observed that additional expenditure outside the scope of existing grants ordinarily required legislative sanction and that the Cabinet could not assume that such expenditure would later be approved by the Legislature.
The Court remarked that fiscal discipline expected in handling public funds was lacking.
Use Of Volunteer Portal Questioned
The Court also expressed concern over the use of the “Social Volunteer Force” portal to recruit volunteers for the programme.
The portal had originally been created in 2020 to mobilise volunteers for disaster management and local crises. The Court observed that the objectives of the Nava Keralam Programme were entirely different and required separate publicity and recruitment.
It noted that no adequate steps were taken to widely publicise volunteer enlistment for the programme.
Political Party Circular Raises Doubts
The Court considered a circular issued by a political party prior to the announcement of the programme calling upon supporters to register as volunteers.
It noted that the circular preceded the government order and appeared to indicate advance knowledge of the scheme. The Bench found the explanation offered by the party secretary unsatisfactory and observed that the circumstances lent credence to allegations of selective information sharing.
Programme Not Barred, But Funding Illegal
The Court clarified that the Government was not barred from undertaking welfare studies or development programmes. However, such programmes must comply with financial rules and administrative procedures.
It emphasised that courts would not interfere with policy decisions but had a duty to intervene where public funds were utilised in violation of legal requirements.
Case Title: Mubas M.H. v. State of Kerala and Ors. and Aloshious Xavier v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Case No: WP(PIL) 4/ 2026 and WP(PIL) 8/2026
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 107
Counsel for petitioner: Anoop V. Nair, Yeshwant Shenoy, Sharannya P., Athul P., C.A. Beema Beevi, Ferra A. Thankam, Tissy Rose K. Cheriyan, Ashika Joshy, Amrutha Selvaraj, Jain Jaison Mathew