Follow TNM’s WhatsApp channel for news updates and story links.
On Tuesday, August 18, Guziliamparai tahsildar M Ayyasamy issued a circular directing revenue officials to collect the names and addresses of members of the Communist Party of India (CPI) and Communist Party of India (Marxist) [CPI(M)] residing in villages under the taluk. The tahsildar’s order required officials to submit the details to him by the same evening.
The controversial circular came after a dispute between the tahsildar and CPI(M) workers over a land issue in Chinnaravuthanpatti village in Dindigul district. Following outrage, the Tamil Nadu government suspended on August 18.
“All Village Assistants are instructed to assist the Revenue Inspectors. Appropriate action will be taken against Village Assistants who fail to submit the report,” the circular said. It triggered criticism from CPI and CPI(M) leaders, who questioned the authority under which revenue officials had sought details of political party members.
CPI(M) state secretary P Shanmugam said the reasons behind the tahsildar's order would be known only after the inquiry. “We do not know why (the tahsildar) issued the orders. But I was told that he has been suspended, and the reasons behind his order will be known only after the inquiry,” he told The Hindu.
Following the controversy, Dindigul Collector Durgamoorthi issued an official note stating that the tahsildar's order was being “immediately withdrawn”. The government also reportedly directed Ayyasamy to appear before the Commissioner of Revenue Administration in Chennai for further inquiry.
What led to the controversy?
The land dispute in Chinnaravuthanpatti village in Dindigul district pertains to the grant of pattas for 1.2 acres of land, issued to eight families from the Scheduled Caste (SC) community in 1994.
According to CPI(M)’s Vedachandur Union secretary G Krishnamoorthy, a person identified as Nandakumar belonging to Most Backward Class (MBC) was carrying out construction work near the land and had allegedly encroached upon the land belonging to the beneficiaries.
The beneficiaries had approached the Guziliamparai tahsildar requesting his intervention in the matter four months ago. Yet, no action had been taken, said Jayapal, CPI(M)’s Guziliamparai Union secretary.
“The beneficiaries approached us and we submitted a petition along with them to tahsildar Ayyasamy on August 11, seeking measurement and proper demarcation of the land covered,” Jayapal told TNM.
He alleged that Ayyasamy however barred them from taking photographs of the beneficiaries at the tahsildar's office, and also denied the party members entry. “The tahsildar told us that no political parties were permitted inside the office to submit petitions and asked us to leave the premises,” Jayapal said.
“What made us feel more uncomfortable was his behaviour. He said he was also a person belonging to a political party and dared us to take the matter to the Chief Minister. He even tried to snatch our mobile phones while we tried to film the developments,” Krishnamoorthy said.
Jayapal and Krishnamoorthy also alleged that the tahsildar had put up a notice restricting visitors to the period between noon and 1 pm and prohibiting mobile phones inside the office.
Jayapal said some of the revenue officials had contacted their party members to collect their details as per the tahsildar's order, but they declined to provide the same.
“The order to collect our details may be an attempt to intimidate us and other party workers,” Jayapal said. “They might have collected details to engage in a preventive arrest of our key party functionaries to stop our protest we planned,” Krishnamoorthy added.
Condemning the tahsildar's action, the CPI(M) announced a protest outside the Guziliamparai tahsildar's office on August 20. This was later withdrawn after Ayyasamy was suspended.
Political parties condemn tahsildar's move
Dindigul CPI(M) MP R Sachithanandam condemned the order and questioned whether a tahsildar had the powers to compile details of members of a national political party.
“Even during the period when the Fingerprint Act was in force, and even when political movements were banned, tahsildars never issued such circulars,” he said.
Sachithanandam also questioned whether the tahsildar had similarly directed officials to compile lists of sand smugglers, encroachers, or criminals.
Pattali Makkal Katchi (PMK) leader Anbumani Ramadoss also condemned the tahsildar’s order, saying that Communist party workers were treated like criminals through the order.
“Under the Constitution of India, political parties have the right to work and campaign for the welfare and rights of the people,” he said, adding that a tahsildar had no authority to take away that right.