Left circular row | Can't pin blame on one official; let govt spell out stance: CPM

CHENNAI: CPM state secretary P Shanmugam has demanded that Chief Minister C Joseph Vijay intervene and initiate action against the Chief Secretary M Sai Kumar, Gujiliamparai tehsildar and other officials responsible for what he described as attempts to suppress Left organisations.

In a letter to the Chief Minister, he said a decision taken by the Chief Secretary, the highest-ranking official in the government administration, could not be treated as the action of an individual official and demanded that the Chief Minister explain the government's position. He also asked to revoke the decision made at the Chief Secretary's meeting and to withdraw the controversial circular entirely.

He criticised the government's response to demands for action against senior officials, saying it was unacceptable to claim that an explanation had been sought from a Joint Director who had forwarded the decision to colleges while no action had been taken against those responsible for the original decision.

Referring to the apology tendered by the Higher Education Minister in the Assembly, Shanmugam said the CPM had not sought an apology. “We have demanded action against those responsible for the wrongdoing and continue to demand the same,” he said, alleging that the government had failed to provide a responsible response.

Shanmugam alleged that a circular issued following a meeting attended by the Chief Secretary and senior officials directed the School Education Department, Higher Education Department, police and district administration to coordinate efforts to prevent students and youth from participating in protests by Left organisations and the Cockroach Janatha Katchi.

He said the directive had been classified as a “high-priority” and “urgent” matter, with action-taken reports sought from the departments. Describing the move as “completely illegal” and unconstitutional, Shanmugam alleged that the government had deliberately targeted Left organisations.

Shanmugam said the right to protest was not limited to Left organisations and alleged that deploying multiple departments to suppress such protests was unconstitutional. He also objected to the police's involvement in educational institutions, arguing that it prevented students from exercising their right to protest.

Shanmugam also accused the government of taking a lenient approach towards the Gujiliamparai tehsildar, who had directed village administrative officers to collect details of CPM and CPI members in the taluk.

He termed the move an act of intimidation, unconstitutional and an abuse of official authority. Although the issue was brought to the government's attention, the district administration initially said the tehsildar would be transferred after completing his training. Subsequently, an explanation was sought from him under Rule 17A of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants' Conduct Rules.

Shanmugam said the action suggested that the government was treating what he described as a serious misuse of official power as a minor disciplinary issue.

He also criticised Law Minister R Nirmalkumar's statement that the tehsildar's circular had no connection with the government and had been issued based on his personal likes and dislikes. Shanmugam said that if a government official had misused his position for personal reasons, it would amount to a serious offence and warrant appropriate action.

He alleged that seeking an explanation under Rule 17A, rather than taking stringent action, appeared to be an attempt to protect the official rather than to hold him accountable.

Shanmugam reiterated his demand for action against the Chief Secretary, the Gujiliamparai tehsildar, and all other officials responsible, as well as the revocation of the decision taken at the Chief Secretary's meeting and the complete withdrawal of the circular.