Kochi, June 30 :    Kochi, June 30:  A legal and political controversy is brewing in Kerala after Governor Sukhdev Singh Kang skipped a paragraph that criticised the Left while reading out his prepared speech in the Assembly. Legal circles are divided on the merits of the Governor's action, but the Congress-led ruling United Democratic Front has openly criticised Kang's omission. The fourth paragraph in his speech that the Governor skipped says: 'In the annals of Kerala polity, the recent elections are significant in many respects. The most notable among them was the reflection of (the) people's spontaneous endorsement of the constructive criticism voiced by the UDF against the last five years of misrule of the Left Democratic Front and the exemplary style of functioning of the UDF as a responsible Opposition. Through their ballots, the people of Kerala have denounced the inaction, misrule, corruption and violence that the LDF (had) unleashed during (its) tenure in office. The attempts of the LDF government to promote their party and the cadres at the expense of the welfare of the people and the development of the state invited public wrath. Fed up with the corruption and excesses of the LDF rule, the people of Kerala had yearned for a change in government. In 1996, the LDF came to power defeating the UDF with a margin of 1,69,418 votes. But in 2001, the people voted UDF back to power with 99 seats and a margin of 842,561 votes....' Minutes after the omission, the UDF leadership demanded an explanation from the Governor. 'If the omission is a mistake, it is all right. But if it is deliberate, then it is serious,' said UDF convener Oomen Chandy. He added that the Governor should clarify the position. Legal experts have taken position for and against the Governor. According to Kelu Nambiar, senior advocate of the Kerala High Court, Kang's action 'is an affront to the government and is unconstitutional as the Governor is expected to act in accordance with the advice of the council of ministers'. He said it would not be surprising even if a demand was made for the recall of the Governor. M.M. Abdul Majeed, another senior lawyer, however differed. The Governor, he said, need not be a mouthpiece of the government. S. Parameswaran, a senior advocate, echoed his views, saying though the Governor is normally supposed to read the speech approved by the Cabinet, the government cannot take any proactive action against him. 'All that it can perhaps do is point out the impropriety of the Governor's action,' he added.