ASSEMBLY POLL '98
COMMENTARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ELECTIONS '98
ARCHIVES

Kannada-Tamil row may rattle Vajpayee

N Sathiya Moorthyin Madras

Even as the seemingly insoluble Cauvery waters row between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu has been resolved, both in form and content, a new dispute has emerged between the two states and their peoples.

Ironically, the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government, which found a solution to the former, is behind the 'injudicious move' that may have far-reaching consequences elsewhere in the country too.

The new dispute is not as intractable as the Cauvery row, but in its larger implications, it may have a greater impact on the unity and integrity of the nation.

In a way, it may also pose a challenge to the Constitution's scheme, under which Article 19 promises 'freedom of employment' for Indian citizens anywhere in the country.

The row started with the Central Staff Selection Commission appointing 19 Tamils with no knowledge of Kannada in the accountant-general's office in Bangalore. They were selected after following the proper course set in the rules, but Kannada chauvinists in Karnataka protested, and those in the AG's office, Bangalore, stayed away from work.

The matter took a political turn when Karnataka Chief Minister J H Patel intervened, and wrote to Vajpayee, protesting against the appointments and seeking their replacement.

The Centre duly acted on these representations, and the appointments of the 19 Tamils were 'cancelled', according to early reports.

If that was cause enough for jubilation among the Kannada chauvinists in Bangalore, who also returned to work, it was cause for concern in Tamil Nadu, with its pan-Tamil socio-political sentiments dating back to the turn of the century.

Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam leader and Chief Minister M Karunanidhi shot off a letter to Vajpayee after local newspapers took up the issue, citing constitutional provisions and administrative precedents.

Karunanidhi has since been joined by other politicians in the state. Even the lone Bharatiya Janata Party member backed the state government's viewpoint when the assembly got to discuss the issue as the first item on the agenda for the opening day of the Budget session, a day after the customary governor's address.

He was backed by the pan-Tamil Pattali Makkal Katchi, an ally of the BJP, apart from the Tamil Maanila Congress, the Communist Party of India, and the CPI-Marxist.

Interestingly, the opposition All-India Anna DMK took the unusual step of cautioning the state government against inciting 'chauvinism'.

AIADMK group leader R Thamariakkani, who had joined other MLAs in giving notice to a calling-attention motion on the issue, spoke in a different tone when given a chance inside the house.

Party chief J Jayalalitha, not one to miss any opportunity to hit out at the DMK government's alleged lack of concern for the state's people and their interests, has maintained a stoic silence thus far.

In a way, the issue concerns the personnel department at the Centre, under Minister of State Kadambur R Janarthanam, an AIADMK politician.

He lost no time in issuing a statement denouncing Karunanidhi's charge of the Centre cancelling the appointments of 19 Tamils. They would be reallocated to other central government offices in Karnataka, he said, assuring that no Tamil would lose his job in the bargain.

But the issue doesn't seem to have died down there. Patel has since said that the Karnataka government will not have them in the state. The 19 Tamils, according to him, could be posted in Tamil Nadu or elsewhere. This, of course, has not been received well in Tamil Nadu.

The DMK has been cautious in its approach to the issue. Karunanidhi advised restraint while replying to the calling-attention motion in the assembly.

His predicament is obvious. While wanting to raise the DMK's pan-Tamil banner -- the electoral plank the party is seeking to revive -- Karunanidhi does not want to be painted black by the AIADMK. Nor does he want to give room for complaints of an 'unconstitutional approach', justifying the AIADMK's demand for dismissal of his government.

The assembly discussion, however, threw light on another aspect of the issue.

According to the chief minister, the Madras-based Staff Selection Commission Regional Director Suvanthara Narayanan, who holds additional charge of Karnataka, has been threatened on phone for making the 19 appointments in the first place.

She has also been threatened with the kidnapping of her daughter, Karunanidhi said, promising police protection to the officer.

The issue raises questions of constitutional propriety and political tension. As is known, even central service officials posted to particular states need not know the local language on appointment. They are given time and tuition to learn it. That being the case, the question remains, why did the Centre succumbed on this one?

"Is it an exemption, or is it going to be the rule?" asks a senior Indian Administrative Service officer in Tamil Nadu. "If you start making exemptions like this, there will be no end to it. Tomorrow, the Centre will be seen as encouraging elements like the Shiv Sena's Bal Thackeray, who had his 'anti-Madrasi' thing going on for some time, and the anti-Bengali movement in states like Assam."

The Centre may find it difficult to justify its stand if the cancellation of appointments, or the re-posting, as the case may be, is taken to the courts.

Article 19 guarantees the right to employment for every citizen of the Union in any part of the country.

By admission, Janarthanam has said the transfers were effected only when the original appointments could not be enforced.

Coming as it does after the lull over the more controversial Cauvery row, the appointments controversy has revived memories of anti-Tamil violence in Karnataka when S Bangarappa was chief minister.

Kannada chauvinists had destroyed Tamil homes, businesses, cinemas and newspaper establishments in Bangalore and elsewhere in the state in the name of protesting against the Centre's notification of the interim award of the Cauvery Waters Dispute Tribunal, seemingly favouring Tamil Nadu. Many Tamils returned to their roots, some never to return.

The Tamil problem has been one of more recent origin in Karnataka, where first-generation labourers from the neighbouring state made up a substantial proportion of the local population since Bangalore became the political nerve centre of the state.

Where the Kannada chauvinists failed for decades, the fans of one-time Kannada film superstar Rajkumar were victorious overnight. That was in the mid-Eighties, and though Rajkumar is well past his prime, and his fan clubs too have become inactive, the issue has caught on in a state with its own share of employment-related problems.

There is a large Kannadiga population in the Tamil Nadu districts bordering Karnataka. Most vegetarian restaurants in the state used to be run by Udipi brahmins, and that's true of the higher-grade restaurants even today. Many temples in the southern states have their priests traditionally coming from villages around Udipi. They have escaped attacks by pan-Tamil forces, both during the Cauvery-related anti-Tamil violence in Karnataka, and now.

It's this harmony that's being repeatedly put to test and pressure every time an 'anti-Tamil issue' of some kind is raised in Karnataka.

Even level-headed opinion-makers like Tamil superstar Rajnikanth -- while Rajkumar is a Tamil by origins, he is a Maharashtrian from Karnataka -- are forced to take partisan positions.

With the actual implementation of the Cauvery accord still holding chances for an annual nightmare, based on the year's rainfall, insensitivity or over-sensitivity to chauvinistic matters on either side are not going to help matters in the long run.

Tell us what you think of this report