Cauvery Management Board row: EPS, OPS to skip AIADMK's hunger strike?

Amid the accusation of the opposition parties that the AIADMK government in Tamil Nadu lacks the courage to take on the BJP government at the centre, the ruling party has released list of senior leaders who will lead the April 3 hunger strike urging the Centre to set up Cauvery Management Board in all the 32 districts but the names of chief minister Edappadi K Palaniswami and his deputy O Panneerselvam were conspicuously absent.

While all the ministers barring – EPS and OPS, senior party leaders, heads of various wings, MPs and MLAs were all named in the list by the party.

With the Cauvery issue appearing to be snowballing into an embarrassment for the ruling AIADMK which has largely been friendly with the Centre, the party on Friday made an announcement on observing the hunger strike next week. The announcement came after the centre failed to set up CMB adhering to the Supreme Court’s February 16 order setting six weeks’ time to act.

The rival TTV Dhinakaran camp taunted the ruling dispensation and challenged them to criticise Prime Minister Narendra Modi during the hunger strike. Dhinakaran aide V Pugazhenthi told reporters here that the chief minister and his deputy should speak out against the Centre. "The fast should not be a mere eyewash," he said, while recalling a hunger strike conducted by Dhinakaran in Thanjavur last week on the same issue.

DMK working president MK Stalin alleged that the AIADMK government was so subservient to the BJP government at the centre it filed its contempt petition at 11.15 am after the latter filed its clarification petition at 11 am. “I had suggested the government to file the contempt petition during the assembly session itself. But they waited so long. It is a drama being enacted by both the centre and the state,” he said.

Immediately after Dhinakaran camp’s challenge, chief minister Palaniswami, issued a statement, saying that the state’s counsel would oppose the centre’s clarification petition in the Supreme Court on the Cauvery issue at the admission stage itself. The centre has sought three months time to implement the SC’s order and also wanted to know whether the board framed under 6(A) of the act can have functions different from the ones recommended for the CMB by the tribunal.

“The centre could have filed the clarification petition immediately after the Apex court order on February 16. The centre’s petition is contradictory to the orders of the Cauvery River Dispute Tribunal and the Supreme Court that order the formation of the CMB and CWRC,” he said, noting that he had instructed the state’s counsel to oppose the centre’s petition in the admission stage itself.