CHENNAI: Kerala Governor Arif Mohamed Khan on Wednesday levelled serious allegation against former Supreme Court judge Rohinton Fali Nariman and his father and senior advocate Fali Sam Nariman by claiming that they received Rs 40 lakhs from Kerala government. He was responding to a query on Rohinton Nariman expresing concern about the tendency of the Governors to sit on bills. On December 2023, Nariman had termed it a “disturbing fact”, making a specific reference to the Kerala Governor. Nariman had said that one of the disturbing fact during the year 2003 was a Governor of a traditionally minority government State, Kerala, sitting over bills for periods of up to 23 months. When the Supreme Court rapped him on his knuckles, what did he do? There were 8 such bills. One bill was assented to, 7 were referred to the President…” Justice Nariman said.Kerala governor Arif Mohamed Khan claimed that Rohinton Nariman’s father and his juniors were paid around Rs 40 lakh by the Kerala government, which indicates a conflict of interest. The governor alleged that the amount was paid despite his Fali Nariman not appearing in the case and showed the gazette notification of the Kerala government sanctioning the amount.”The father is receiving money and the son is giving opinions blasting the governor. This is not following the principle of natural justice,” he said, speaking on the first day of the 13th edition of ThinkEdu conclave on Wednesday. He was speaking on the topic ‘Chancellors and State Universities: Defining the Role’ chaired by Prabhu Chawla, Editorial Director of .When asked if appointing Governors, who are political appointees, as the chancellor of universities, would politicise the educational institutions, Khan said that the appointment of chancellors by the President, and not by the executive, is the only way to ensure the autonomy of universities. “Politically, India has been fragmented and there is no dearth of politicians who are swayed by this to get public support. They start pursuing things that are not very conducive to his stance in national unity. It was a very wise decision taken at that time to not vest the power to appoint chancellor with the executive,” he said.He added that the bills that are pending with the governor should be money bills. “The purpose of the bills is to remove the governor as chancellor and give the authority to the government to appoint the Chancellors. Through this, the state will incur some expenditure and it should be called a money bill. The prior approval of the governor is needed for a money bill. To avoid this, they passed on the responsibility to meet the expenses to the universities. In my opinion, those bills are money bills,” he said.
Source link
