Leftist-Dravidian Director Karu Palaniappan has sparked significant outrage after making controversial remarks about former President of India, Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, and Tamil Nadu’s former Chief Minister, K. Kamarajar, during a centenary celebration event. His comments have been widely criticized as disrespectful and politically motivated.
The event was held on 25 July 2025, at the Samuthirapatti Government Primary School near Natham in Dindigul district, marking the school’s 100th anniversary. The function was attended by local officials, including the Natham Taluk Officer, the Chief Education Officer, educators, villagers, and Karu Palaniappan as a special guest.
Criticism of Dr. Abdul Kalam
While addressing the audience, Palaniappan took aim at Dr. Kalam, implying that the former president had a bias toward private school students. He stated, “Why do I immediately agree to come to government schools? Do you know why? It’s because I really like Abdul Kalam sir. What did Abdul Kalam do? He went and met students. Which students did he meet? He met young children. No, he met all private school kids. I’d think, ‘Sir didn’t have time to see government school kids,’ so what I’ll do is, ‘Let’s continue from where Abdul Kalam sir left off. We’ll go and see the government school kids.’ What happens if you go to government school kids? It’s not just about going to see them. If we go and participate, it becomes an event. If it’s an event, the District Educational Officer will come. If the District Educational Officer comes, the Tahsildar will come. If the Tahsildar comes, they’ll paint the building. If the Tahsildar comes, they’ll clean the toilets that day.”
Implying Political Motive in Honoring Kamarajar
Palaniappan didn’t stop there. He later targeted the legacy of K. Kamarajar, a leader revered for his contribution to public education in Tamil Nadu. He implied that invoking Kamarajar’s name in official documents or celebrations is a political act.
He pointed out that a commemorative booklet highlighted that a hut-style school building was inaugurated in 1963 by then-minister Kakkan, under Kamarajar’s administration. But Palaniappan seemed bothered that similar credits were not explicitly given to later DMK-led governments.
He lamented, “If you see in the paper, all the special features mentioned about this particular school. These things were done only for this school, not across all of Tamil Nadu, only for this school. But how is it mentioned? It says, ‘The Merur hut building was inaugurated in 1963 by Kakkan, who was a minister during Kamarajar’s rule.’ Just for one school. But then, in the 2024-25 academic year, to bring out the unique talents of students, the Kalai Thiruvizha was started by the Tamil Nadu government across the whole of Tamil Nadu. Right? Here, the hut school building that came up was during Kamarajar’s time. Then again, in 1980, what started as a primary school was upgraded to a middle school. By whom? By the Tamil Nadu government. And then in 2010, it became a higher secondary school with modern facilities. By whom? By the Tamil Nadu government. But in 1963, who built the hut building? It was during Kamarajar’s rule. That’s it. This is the politics. Either you say ‘by the Tamil Nadu government’ for everything, or you say ‘during MGR’s rule,’ ‘Jayalalithaa’s rule,’ ‘Karunanidhi’s rule,’ ‘Stalin’s rule’ for everything. If we understand that, we’ll understand development. It’s a huge political game to mention names only when it’s convenient, and then just say ‘Tamil Nadu government’ when it’s not.”
Palaniappan’s comments have drawn severe criticism from across the political and public spectrum. Many consider his remarks on Dr. Kalam both unfounded and disrespectful, particularly given Kalam’s widespread popularity and his well-documented efforts to engage with students of all backgrounds, including government schools.
Similarly, his criticism of Kamarajar who is widely regarded as a pioneering figure in expanding public education has been perceived as an attempt to downplay a historic legacy to favor Dravidian political narratives. Critics argue that the director’s frustration stems from the DMK not being explicitly credited in event materials, and that his comments expose the politicization of legacy and education.
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.