Thiruvananthapuram: The state govt is facing acute embarrassment after the high court set aside its order sanctioning the Nava Kerala Citizen Response Programme, even as budget documents reveal that no financial provision was actually earmarked for the project.The govt has since moved the Supreme Court challenging the high court verdict. However, a close reading of the budget documents presented by finance minister K N Balagopal on Jan 29 raises questions about the financial planning behind the proposed survey, seen by critics as politically motivated and funded with public money.
The Oct 10, 2025 govt order authorizing the Nava Kerala Citizen Response Programme, reportedly aimed at gathering public feedback on development and welfare initiatives, had stated that the Rs 20 crore required for the exercise would be met from the budget head ‘Special PR Campaigns’.For the financial year 2025–26, the total allocation under this head was only Rs 4.60 crore. In the 2026–27 budget presented on Jan 29, the revised estimate for the same head was further reduced to Rs 4 crore, Rs 60 lakh less than the original allocation.This indicates that even the revised financial estimate does not reflect any provision for an expenditure of Rs 20 crore.Notably, the Oct 2025 order committing Rs 20 crore does not find mention in the revised estimate placed before the assembly in Jan. In effect, the budget head identified to fund the survey does not contain sufficient allocation even on paper, raising questions about how the govt intended to finance the programme.Even if the Supreme Court ultimately grants relief to the govt, the financial liability may not fall within the tenure of the present administration. In the absence of allocation in the current budget cycle, the payment of the Rs 20 crore is likely to spill over to the next financial year, and potentially to the next govt.If that scenario unfolds, the burden of clearing the dues arising from the present administration’s decision would rest on its successor.The controversy has therefore moved beyond a legal setback to a fiscal and administrative issue: How was a Rs 20-crore commitment issued without corresponding budgetary backing? With the matter now before the Supreme Court, the legal challenge continues, but the financial arithmetic reflected in the budget documents remains difficult to reconcile.
