Kerala BJP leader Kummanam Rajasekharan moved the Supreme Court challenging the Pinarayi Vijayan government's move approaching the apex court over the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA).
In the petition, the government stated that the act violates "Articles 14, 21, and 25 of the Constitution of India" and is violative of the basic structure of the Constitution and the principle of secularism. Kummanam Rajasekharan, who is also an ex-Governor for Mizoram, stated that the government could not have taken this move without consulting the governor of the state.
Rajasekharan has sought impleadment in the suit and insisted that the matter is only a political dispute and no rights of any inhabitants of Kerala were violated. He also emphasized the fact that public funds were unnecessarily used for this litigation before even consulting the governor.
Rajasekharan's plea has sought to know why the legal dispute between the Union and the state was waged since the Kerala government was filed under Article 131 of the Constitution which says that the Supreme court is the guardian of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 14.
Kummanam Rajasekhara's plea asked why specifically this provision was chosen when the Supreme court could have been approached directly under Article 32 of the Constitution which is the main guardian if any fundamental rights have been violated.
After the Kerala government moved to the Supreme Court against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), Governor Arif Mohammad Khan, said that it was a 'breach' of protocol since the state government needed to inform the Governor before they took such a drastic move.
"This is a breach of protocol and a breach of courtesy. I will look into it whether the state government can go to the SC without the approval of the Governor. If not the approval, they could have just informed me," said Khan.