Quashing of Nava Kerala survey: Prior approval needed for spending additional funds

KOCHI: The High Court has ruled that if additional scheme funds are to be spent without being included in the Budget, they must be presented as a Demand for Grants as per the Manual and prior approval of the Legislative Assembly must be obtained. The observation was made by a Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice V M Syam Kumar while cancelling the Nava Kerala Survey.

The court also said that bills must receive proper approval. It rejected the government’s argument that approval could be obtained after the money was spent.

Party circular before government order

• The court noted that the government’s decision was in line with a circular issued by CPM state secretary M V Govindan, asking district committees to register volunteers on a portal. There is no dispute that the party circular was issued even before the government order and Cabinet decision.
• Volunteers for the survey were selected through a portal created in 2020 for disaster management purposes. The court observed that the process was not widely publicised and was carried out through a “narrow window,” strengthening allegations of information leakage.
• Under the Rules of Business, the Information and Public Relations Department is allowed to implement Community Listening Schemes with an allocation of Rs 4.6 crore. The court said there was no proper justification for assigning the Nava Kerala Survey to this department and granting Rs 20 crore, which exceeded its authority.

Court rejects arguments of government and Govindan
The government argued that courts cannot interfere in policy decisions. However, the High Court rejected this claim and quashed the survey. The bench clarified that if there are complaints of misuse of public funds, the court has the authority to examine the matter.

Petitioners had alleged that the survey was conducted following a party decision, using party cadres. In response, M V Govindan argued that there were differences between the party circular and the government scheme and that there was nothing wrong in party workers cooperating with a government project. The court did not accept these arguments.

Advocate General K Gopalakrishna Kurup, appearing for the government, said the survey was conducted based on a Cabinet decision and that funds were allocated with financial approval. He also stated that it was voluntary service and that volunteers were not paid. However, the court pointed out that Cabinet decisions must be placed before the Legislative Assembly and that ministers are collectively responsible. When public funds are used, the Rules of Business must be strictly followed. The court also observed that complex survey procedures requiring qualified professionals were entrusted to volunteers under the name of ‘Karmasena’. Therefore, the allegation that the survey had political objectives cannot be dismissed, the judgment stated.