CM defends detente with Governor over V-C postings, travel with Natesan

Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan on Wednesday defended the Kerala government’s detente with Governor Rajendra Vishwanath Arlekar on the appointments of Vice-Chancellors (V-C) to APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University and Digital University, Kerala. 

Mr. Vijayan said Mr. Arlekar called him and invited him to Lok Bhavan to reach a consensus and end the uncertainty in the higher education sector. “During the interaction, I wondered whether a belated via media would ward off the Supreme Court’s intervention in the dispute. I told Mr. Arlekar that the government required time to seek legal opinion. Consequently, the government consulted the Advocate General. He counselled that a mutually satisfactory agreement was in order, given that the Supreme Court had urged the government and Lok Bhavan to end the deadlock undesired by students, teachers, parents and the broader academic community by reaching an agreement,” he said. (Consequently, the government appointed the Governor’s nominee Ciza Thomas as the KTU V-C and the government’s choice Saji Gopinath as Digital University V-C.)

Mr. Vijayan dismissed the Congress accusation that the Left Democratic Front (LDF) government had capitulated to the Governor to appease the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led Union government. He said the government wanted to end the contentious period which disrupted higher education.

Mr. Vijayan also defended allowing Sree Narayana Dharma Paripalana (SNDP) Yogam president Vellappally Natesan to accompany him in the Chief Minister’s official car to the venue of the Ayyappa Sangamam at Pampa in September. “It was a courtesy extended to a senior citizen who heads an influential social organisation. There is no need to read narrow-minded politics in the episode. I spared Mr. Natesan, an octogenarian, from walking the distance to the venue. Moreover, some quarters attempted to portray Mr. Natesan as some untouchable villain,” he said.

When asked whether Mr. Natesan’s “invective” against Muslims had alienated the minority community from the Left Democratic Front (LDF) during the local body polls, Mr. Vijayan said: “Mr. Natesan has clarified that he was not anti-Muslim. He stated that he had reserved his criticism for the Indian Union Muslim League (IUML).”

Mr. Vijayan said it would be reductive to assign the LDF’s poor showing in the polls to the Sabarimala gold theft scandal alone. “If Sabarimala had an adverse effect, it did not reflect in Pandalam, the heartland of the Ayyappa faith. The LDF wrested the municipality from the BJP. Similarly, deeply Hindu temple towns, including Kodungalloor, remained with the LDF,” he said.