The Sarkaria Commission report of the 1970s is back in the spotlight in the DMK corruption debate in Tamil Nadu. For years, former Chief Minister and AIADMK supremo J Jayalalithaa had used the Commission’s findings to attack the DMK both in the Assembly and in her political speeches.
Years later, the current Chief Minister, C Joseph Vijay, used the same report to launch a broad attack on the DMK, citing allegations of corruption during its previous tenures.
The Sarkaria Commission was a one-man commission appointed in 1976 to investigate allegations of corruption and misuse of power against the DMK government that was in power in Tamil Nadu from 1971-1976.
M Karunanidhi had been the Chief Minister then and many of the allegations that the Commission looked at were directly related to him.
It was convened after Dravidian stalwart MG Ramachandran submitted complaints to the President, after he broke away from the DMK, alleging corruption involving Karunanidhi and his ministers.
After the DMK government was dismissed on January 31, 1976, during the Emergency, Justice Ranjit Singh Sarkaria, a Supreme Court judge, was appointed to head the inquiry.
The Commission was asked to examine 28 allegations, covering alleged corruption, misuse of official position and irregularities involving the Karunanidhi government.
Vijay alleged that the Sarkaria Commission had recorded an instance in which a relative of Karunanidhi had demanded a 2.5% commission in connection with the award of a tender.
He also alleged that the report had recorded that Karunanidhi had misused his office to facilitate the award of the Veeranam water tender to the Sathyanarayana Brothers group and had pressured then Chief Engineer Hussain.
The Veeranam project was supposed to provide drinking water to the city of Chennai, which faced acute water scarcity then. In 1970, the company was awarded the contract to manufacture, supply, lay, and test pre-stressed concrete pipes. The project came to a halt after allegations of corruption and the subsequent Sarkaria Commission inquiry.
Though the Commission had looked at 28 allegations, the report, however, concluded on only seven allegations, finding six of them to be true or partially true and one to be false. However, no findings were published on the Veeranam project. Veeranam was the tenth allegation that the commission probed.
In February 2011, J Jayalalithaa brought up the Sarkaria Commission in her speech in the TN Assembly saying, “Tamil Nadu’s Chief Minister M Karunanidhi deserves to be complimented for one thing at least. When it comes to scientific corruption, he has shown remarkable consistency right from his very first term as chief minister in the late 1960s.”
She then went on to cite an allegation that was about a house purchased by Karunandihi’s family. She said, “One can only sympathise with Justice Sarkaria. He had to sift through such confusing data in 28 different charges! Little wonder that he certified Karunanidhi as the “Master of Scientific Corruption!!”
Though the word ‘scientific corruption’ cannot be found in any of the volumes of the Commission’s report online, many have written about this phrase in the past.
CM alleges ‘party funds’ in tenders
Vijay then placed a document before the Assembly that he said had been sent by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to the previous DMK government and read out portions from it.
According to Vijay, the document referred to the alleged collection of 7.5% to 10% of the value of individual tenders as “party funds”.
TNM had reported last year that the ED had alleged that at least Rs 1,020 crore has been collected as bribes by widespread tender rigging in the Municipal Administration Department and cited digital evidence obtained during the searches conducted on then minister KN Nehru, his family members and associates.
The ED had sent a 258-page dossier to the state Chief Secretary, Head of Police Force (HoPF) and Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) under section 66(2) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) on December 3, 2025, seeking registration of an FIR by TN police to investigate the corruption.
The ED cannot unilaterally proceed with a money laundering investigation unless there is an existing FIR registered by an investigation agency. This is why the ED wrote multiple times to the TN government asking for an FIR to be lodged.
Vijay alleged that the document named the then Chief Minister MK Stalin, Deputy Chief Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin and others as alleged beneficiaries.
Senthil Balaji and ‘Karur gang’
Vijay also levelled allegations against former minister V Senthil Balaji in connection with alleged irregularities in the Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation (TASMAC).
He claimed that ED had stated that Senthil Balaji had misused his ministerial position from 2021 onwards with a “dishonest intention” and had been involved in a criminal conspiracy.
Vijay referred to a person named Ratheesh, whom he said the ED had described as a “central figure” and an “unauthorised power broker”. He questioned Ratheesh’s political connections and claimed that he had gone to Dubai after the change in government.
The Chief Minister further alleged that political intermediaries operating around Coimbatore and Karur collected money from bars. He said the ED referred to the group as the “Karur gang” and termed their activities as an organised system.
He said that the documents he had referred to covered only two departments and wondered what would emerge if records relating to other departments were examined.
“They say that wherever the DMK is, there will be no wrongdoing. But wrongdoing happens where the DMK is,” Vijay said.
DMK stages walkout
The Chief Minister’s speech was repeatedly disrupted by DMK members, who raised slogans, surrounded the Speaker and later staged a sit-in on the floor of the House.
At one point, Vijay helped DMK MLA Durai Chandrasekaran when he appeared to have difficulty getting up from the floor.
DMK deputy leader KN Nehru asked Vijay to request the Speaker to allow Udhayanidhi Stalin to respond. Vijay was seen gesturing that the decision rested with the Speaker. Later, Vijay himself asked the Speaker to allow the DMK to speak.
However, Speaker JCD Prabhakar refused, saying the DMK members had not allowed Vijay even a minute to speak when he began his reply. The DMK subsequently staged a walkout.
With inputs from Yashavini Ezhilmurugan