‘Misuse’ of CM Disaster Relief Fund: Kerala Lok Ayukta Refers Complaint Against Chief Minister, Others To Full Bench After Difference Of Opinion

The Lok Ayukta on Friday referred the case against the Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan and the former Ministers alleging misuse of amount in the Chief Minister Disaster Relief Fund (CMDRF) to a Full Bench comprising the Lok Ayukta and both the Upa-Lok Ayuktas.

It was alleged in the complaint by R.S. Sasikumar that the decisions taken by the State Government in:

firstly, giving financial assistance to the family of late Uzhavoor Vijayan by sanctioning a a total amount of Rs.25 lakhs from the CMDRF towards his medical expenses, and the educational expenses of his two children;

secondly, sanctioning necessary amount from the CMDRF for clearing the arrears of loans taken by late Advocate K.K.Ramachandran Nair, MLA, from Government recognized institutions and providing a government job to his son; and

lastly, sanctioning a financial aid of Rs.20 lakhs from the CMDRF to the legal heirs of late Civil Police Officer P. Praveen, who died in a motor accident while performing escort duty for the former Home Minister and State Secretary of CPI (M) late Kodiyeri Balakrishnan,

were actuated by corruption, favouritism, and nepotism. It was also alleged that the respondents lacked integrity in discharging their duties as public servants. 

The bench of Justice Cyriac Joseph and Justice Harun-Ul-Rasheed observed that since there was a difference of opinion as to the basic issue involved as to whether the actions of the Chief Minister and the then Ministers in taking the impugned decisions as members of the Cabinet could be subjected to investigation under the provisions of the Kerala Lok Ayukta Act, 1999, and on merits of the allegations, the same would have to be placed for investigation by the Lok Ayukta and both the Upa-Lok Ayuktas together as required under Section 7(1) of the Act, 1999. 

The Case

The complainant has said that there were several other occasions in which accident occurred to the security personnel, who provided security to the Ministers and other protectees, but no such financial assistance from the CMDRF had been provided to such families.

He has also alleged that the financial assistance granted to the family of late Praveen was solely because he was a part of the team of security personnel who provided escort to the then State Secretary of CPI(M). Additionally, it has been alleged that the law itself did not provide pilot vehicles to the State Secretary of CPI(M) and the duty performed in that regard could not be considered as duty performed by the public servant in due discharge of his duty. 

It has been contended that there are guidelines in place for the administration of the CMDRF, which clearly indicate that financial assistance could not be given from the CMDRF for such purposes.

The complainant has also alleged that as per the guidelines, annual income of the persons seeking financial assistance should not be more than Rs.1 lakh and the impugned decisions were taken in violation of the said guidelines. The decisions were also not taken pursuant to any application made in that behalf, but as 'out of agenda' by the Council of Ministers, thus further violating the guidelines for administration of the CMDRF, the complaint alleges. 

The Lok Ayukta has stated that the case shall forthwith be posted before the Bench comprising the Lok Ayukta and both the Upa Lok Ayuktas on a date to be fixed by it.