Under no obligation to induct Thomas K Thomas replacing Saseendran, hints Pinarayi

MLA Thomas K Thomas
MLA Thomas K Thomas. Photo: Manorama

Thiruvananthapuram: An adjournment motion moved by the Opposition UDF on Thursday seeking protection for ruling party MLA Thomas K Thomas, who has claimed there was a conspiracy to kill him, might have ended up causing the Kuttanad MLA his biggest political disappointment.

Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan gave a clear hint in the Assembly that he was under no obligation to induct Thomas as the new forest minister replacing A K Saseendran.

Thomas had always believed that the ministership would come to him at the half-point of the ministry and has publicly stated that his party leader Praful Patel had met the Chief Minister and conveyed the NCP supremo Sharad Pawar's decision that the post should equally be shared between Saseendran and Thomas.

On Thursday, Pinarayi contradicted Thomas. "Praful Patel did indeed meet me but it was not to speak of the sharing of the minister's post. It was for another issue, related to their party," Pinarayi said. He did not elaborate what this issue was except to say that it was something close to Pawar and was already shared with him by Saseendran.

This is the first time that the Chief Minister had made a public mention of the sharing of cabinet berths. There was an understanding that the MLAs of smaller LDF allies like Democratic Kerala Congress (Antony Raju), Kerala Congress (B) (K B Ganesh Kumar) and Nationalist Congress Party (Saseendran and Thomas) would share berths.

There is no dispute in Janata Dal (Secular) as former minister Mathew T Thomas has opted out of the race. Therefore, K Krishnankutty, the power minister, will continue the entire stretch. His position could come under threat only if the Lok Janatantrik Dal (LJD), a breakaway faction created by the late M P Veerendra Kumar, merges with the JD(S). LJD has an MLA, former minister K P Mohanan.

Ganesh's induction looks remote as he had been asked to first settle a long-standing property dispute within his family. Any family-related court case against a minister could be an embarrassment to the LDF government. So by keeping him out, the LDF is being cautious. Antony Raju gains.

At this stage, Thomas's swearing-in also looks highly unlikely. His party chief, P C Chacko, is against him. And now, after the UDF has complained that the police was not doing enough to protect him, the Chief Minister has asserted that there was no agreement to share a cabinet berth as repeatedly claimed by Thomas. Also, even if there was an agreement, the Chief Minister can easily ignore it as a good chunk of the NCP, including Praful Patel, is now shifted it's loyalty to the BJP.

It was Congress MLA M Vincent who moved an adjournment motion asking that the House to be temporarily suspended to discuss the threat of life to the Kuttanad MLA. Vincent's motion was based on a complaint filed by Thomas to the State Police Chief in which he had stated that there were attempts by his own party men to trap him in non-bailable cases and when those did not work out, a conspiracy was hatched to kill him. Thomas had said in his complaint that once there was a plan to kill him using a 'pandi lorry' (heavy vehicle) and later to push his car into a swamp and drown him.

Opposition Leader V D Satheesan questioned forest minister Saseendran's comment that Thomas's complaint was an "immature" one. "Wasn't the minister saying that his party MLA was lying? How can anyone holding a Constitutional post make such a comment? When a minister makes such a comment how can the police be expected to investigate the case in a fair manner," Satheesan said.

The Chief Minister said the police would take stern action if the complaint was found to be true. Thomas also attempted a late pleasing act. He said that he had full confidence in the police and the government.

Interestingly, it was after this placatory move that the Chief Minister made the comment that sounded like the death knell of Thomas's ministerial ambitions.

The comments posted here/below/in the given space are not on behalf of Onmanorama. The person posting the comment will be in sole ownership of its responsibility. According to the central government's IT rules, obscene or offensive statement made against a person, religion, community or nation is a punishable offense, and legal action would be taken against people who indulge in such activities.