Kerala CM says no decision yet on PM SHRI scheme
Kerala Chief Minister VD Satheesan on Wednesday said the State had not yet taken a decision on implementing the Centre’s PM SHRI scheme and that a final call would be made only after examining the legal implications arising from an agreement signed by the previous LDF Government.
Responding to questions over media reports suggesting that the Congress-led UDF Government might join the scheme despite opposing it while in the Opposition, Satheesan said there were several issues, including PM SHRI and the Labour Code, on which the previous Government had already taken action. “We have not made any decision. Media reports are emerging based on decisions that have not been made. We will take a decision only after obtaining a legal opinion,” he said.
The chief minister launched a sharp attack on the previous LDF Government, alleging that it had publicly opposed Kerala’s participation in the Pradhan Mantri Schools for Rising India scheme while quietly signing an agreement with the Centre. According to Satheesan, the present situation arose because the previous Government entered into the MoU without informing even other members of the Cabinet.
“It was not individuals but the Government of Kerala that signed the agreement. Though Governments have changed, the State remains bound by agreements entered into in its name. We are examining the legal aspects of the matter,” he said.
Satheesan alleged that only the then CM (Pinarayi Vijayan) and the then general education minister (V Sivankutty) were aware of the signing of the agreement.
He claimed that even while CPI ministers strongly opposed the scheme during Cabinet discussions, the fact that an MoU had already been signed was allegedly concealed from them.
Satheesan alleged that the agreement was signed without Cabinet approval and said the UDF’s objection was primarily to the manner in which such an important decision was taken without informing coalition partners or the Cabinet.
His remarks come amid a political debate over the PM SHRI scheme, with sections of the media reporting that the UDF Government was considering joining the centrally sponsored programme.
The Opposition CPI(M) has accused the Government of attempting to implement the scheme despite its earlier criticism of it.
The PM SHRI issue became contentious during the tenure of the previous LDF Government after Kerala signed an MoU with the Centre.
The State later kept the scheme in abeyance following objections from coalition partner CPI, which argued that the programme could facilitate the implementation of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
Replying to questions on alleged saffronisation in university appointments and Governor Rajendra Vishwanath Arlekar’s intervention in higher education matters, Satheesan said such interference in university affairs was not new and had occurred under previous Governments as well.
He said controversies relating to appointments to university syndicates and the selection of vice-chancellors were longstanding issues, adding that the responsibility for submitting the relevant panels rested with the previous Government. Satheesan said the governor’s intervention in university affairs predated the present Government and added that the administration would undertake a comprehensive review of existing procedures related to universities.
Responding to criticism over the appointment of senior IAS officer B Ashok as Principal Secretary of the Higher Education Department, Satheesan said the Government did not take into account the political views or background of IAS officers while making appointments.
Ashok had publicly supported the governor’s actions and was suspended earlier this year after disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him over alleged violations of service conduct rules.
His suspension was later revoked by the present UDF Government, though the disciplinary proceedings are continuing.
Satheesan also pointed to a severe shortage of IAS officers in Kerala, with many opting for central deputation in New Delhi.
As a result, the Government was often forced to manage departments through additional-charge arrangements and faced considerable difficulty in making administrative appointments, he added.
