Keralam Governor Om Prakash Mathur (left) has sparked a political row over a reported vegetarian-only kitchen order at Lok Bhavan. 
India

Keralam Governor’s vegetarian-only kitchen directive triggers political row

Om Prakash Mathur’s reported directive draws criticism from the Congress and CPI(M), while Lok Bhavan sources say it applies only to the kitchen preparing meals for the Governor and his family.

Bishnu J

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: Keralam Governor Om Prakash Mathur’s reported directive to make the Lok Bhavan kitchen vegetarian-only has triggered a political controversy on his first day in office, with the Congress and the CPI(M) accusing him of seeking to impose his personal food preferences on others.

Mathur was sworn in as the 29th Governor of Keralam on Friday. Reports of his instruction that non-vegetarian food should not be prepared or served in the kitchen emerged shortly before and after he assumed office.

Congress general secretary K C Venugopal criticised the move, alleging that it went beyond the Governor’s personal dietary preferences and amounted to an attempt to impose the Sangh Parivar’s ideological agenda in the state.

Venugopal said Keralam had a diverse food culture and that people had the right to choose what they ate. He argued that restricting established food habits would infringe on individual freedom and urged the Governor to withdraw the directive.

State Home Minister Ramesh Chennithala also criticised the reported instruction, saying food choices were a matter of personal freedom. CPI(M) state secretary M V Govindan similarly said the Governor was free to follow a vegetarian diet but should not impose that preference on others.

Lok Bhavan sources, however, clarified that the instruction applied only to the kitchen preparing meals for the Governor and a few members of his personal staff. They said employees’ food choices had not been restricted, as staff either brought meals from home or ate outside, while a separate kitchen was available for staff in the residential quarters.

The clarification has placed the focus on the scope of the directive, as political leaders continue to question whether the decision reflects a personal dietary preference or an attempt to influence food practices in the state.