Mano Thangaraj sworn-in as minister in Tamil Nadu cabinet
Padmanabhapuram DMK MLA T Mano Thangaraj, who was dropped from the cabinet in September 2024, was sworn-in as a minister and re-inducted in the MK Stalin-led cabinet. This comes a day after the resignation of Senthil Balaji and K Ponmudy from the cabinet.
Governor RN Ravi administered the oath of office to Thangaraj, who was removed as Milk and Dairy Development minister in the previous rejig of the cabinet. He was allotted the same portfolio on Monday.
The event also saw chief minister MK Stalin and governor Ravi meet for the first time post the DMK government securing a favourable verdict in the Supreme Court against the latter delaying assent to various Bills adopted in the state assembly. The CM and governor shook hands and exchanged pleasantries.
The governor on Sunday approved chief minister Stalin's recommendation on their resignation, a communique from the Raj Bhavan said. The resignations came days after Senthil Balaji, facing ED probe in a cash-for-jobs case in an earlier AIADMK regime, was asked by the Supreme Court on Wednesday to make a choice 'between post and freedom' as it had warned him of cancelling bail if he did not step down as minister.
'When you were a minister, categorical findings have been recorded against you in the manner in which you brought about settlement and the proceedings are quashed. Grant of bail does not mean power to influence witnesses. In the past, you have influenced witnesses,' the bench had said. The top court, as a result, offered him a choice.
'So, you have to make a choice between the post and the freedom. Such drastic findings are recorded against you in capacity as a minister,' the bench had said while hearing pleas to recall Balaji's bail on the ground that he influenced witnesses in the case.
Ponmudy, a senior Darvida Munnetra Kazhgam leader, courted a major controversy recently over his Shaivite-Vaishnavite remarks, drawing widespread criticism, even as the Madras high court later initiated proceedings on its own on the matter.
Transport minister S S Sivasankar will handle Electricity portfolio, held by Senthil Balaji. Further, housing minister S Muthusamy has been allotted excise and prohibition, also held by Senthil Balaji.
RS Rajakannappan has been allotted Ponmudy's forests and Khadi, in addition to his existing milk and dairy development portfolio, the release said.
'The minor reshuffle balances communities within the cabinet,' said political analyst Maalan Narayanan. 'With Sivasankar, Muthusamy, and Rajakannappan, Stalin has reached out to the dominant Vanniyar, Gounder, and Yadava communities, respectively. The Vanniyar community is a vote bank of NDA ally Pattali Makkal Katchi and with the AIADMK joining the NDA again on April 11, it is key for the DMK to also build support among the Vanniyars who are dominant in the northern and western region.' (ATTRIBUTION)
'And, with Thangaraj they are looking at Christian votes, the region of Kanyakumari. The undercurrent is that Christians may largely support Vijay who is also a Christian and the DMK has no real strategy so far against TVK,' he said.
Ponmudy, a strongman Villupuram district strongman, is one of the DMK's old hands who entered the Tamil Nadu cabinet for the first time in 1989. 'He is on the verge of retirement with the next generation of leaders in the DMK taking charge so it is a good riddance for the party concerning him. Ponmudi had also created rivals in Villupuram and was overly pushing for his son,'Maalan said.
In the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, Ponmudy's son Gautam Sigamani was denied nomination for Kallakurichi parliamentary seat. However, he was appointed as the DMK's secretary for Villupuram (East) district.
'But Balaji won't be affected like Ponmudi. He may be a blemish but he brings the funds to the party either directly or indirectly which is required for elections. His hold in his native Karur is built from scratch. Loyalty will count more than morality here,' the analyst said.
'DMK wouldn't want to lose him. They will let the legal cases reach its logical conclusion. Balaji won't be a minister but he will move freely. He will continue to be close to the CM, the party high command,' he added.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
22 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Maharashtra reconstitutes panel on Karnataka border row
BELAGAVI: In a fresh move to bolster its stance on the boundary dispute with Karnataka, the Maharashtra government has reconstituted its high power committee. The committee will be headed by Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis. Several top leaders from different political parties of Maharashtra are on this panel, which was earlier headed by former CM Eknath Shinde. The 18-member committee includes DyCMs Eknath Shinde and Ajit Pawar, former CMs Sharad Pawar, Prithviraj Chavan, and Narayan Rane, and border affairs expert Prof Avinash Kolhe. Ministers Chandrakant Dada Patil and Shambhuraje Desai are on the core coordination team attached to the panel and are tasked with handling matters related to the Maharashtra Ekikaran Samiti (MES), a pro-Marathi outfit based in Karnataka. According to informed sources, the committee will draw up strategies to not only strengthen the boundary case stronger in the Supreme Court but would also dwell upon various alternatives which could help Maharashtra in the ongoing tussle. Sources said that MES leaders may be asked to provide information about the dispute which could benefit Maharashtra. It may be noted that at the behest of MES, the Maharashtra government is involved in a legal and political battle with Karnataka, staking its claim on hundreds of villages and towns of Karnataka along the border, including Belagavi, Khanapur, Karwar, Bhalki, and Nippani.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Wife's WhatsApp chats obtained via 'spy app' used as valid evidence about her extramarital affair in Divorce case, what Madhya Pradesh HC said
In a crucial ruling, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has reportedly permitted a husband to present his wife's private WhatsApp chats as evidence in a divorce case, even though they were obtained without her consent. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The court's decision, based on Section 14 of the Family Courts Act , 1984, allows Family Courts to consider evidence that may not be admissible under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, to resolve disputes like divorce. The case arose when the husband, using a special app (spy app) installed on his wife's phone without her knowledge, accessed her private WhatsApp conversations. These chats allegedly revealed an extramarital affair, prompting the husband to seek divorce on grounds of cruelty and adultery. The wife's legal team objected, arguing that presenting the chats violated her under Article 21 of the Constitution and Sections 43, 66, and 72 of the Information Technology Act, 2000. They further contended that evidence obtained illegally should be inadmissible. Rejecting these arguments, the High Court emphasized that while the right to privacy is a fundamental right under Article 21, it is not absolute and is subject to limitations. Citing Supreme Court judgments, including the Sharda and Puttaswami cases, the court noted that statutory provisions like Section 14 of the Family Courts Act and Section 122 of the Indian Evidence Act permit limited invasions of privacy in the interest of justice. The court framed the issue as a conflict between two fundamental rights under Article 21: the wife's right to privacy and the husband's right to a fair trial. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now It ruled that the right to privacy must yield to the right to a fair trial, which has broader implications for public justice. 'A litigating party has a right to bring relevant evidence before the court,' the court stated, adding that denying this opportunity would undermine the Family Courts Act's intent. The High Court clarified that it was not ruling on the authenticity of the WhatsApp chats, leaving that determination to the Family Court. If the chats are deemed genuine, they could support the husband's case for divorce on grounds of cruelty and adultery. This ruling has sparked debate over the balance between privacy rights and the pursuit of justice in family disputes, with potential implications for how digital evidence is handled in Indian courts.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Federal appeals court blocks Louisiana's controversial law regarding public schools which put Christianity at the forefront
A federal appeals court has unanimously blocked Louisiana's controversial law requiring public schools to display the Ten Commandments in every classroom, marking a significant victory for civil liberties groups and families who argued the mandate violated the constitutional separation of church and state. The three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed a lower court's November 2024 decision that deemed the law 'facially unconstitutional' under the First Amendment. The law, enacted this year, required all public K-12 schools and state-funded colleges to prominently display a government-approved version of the Ten Commandments, regardless of classroom subject matter. State officials had provided guidelines for the posters, but implementation was suspended pending legal challenges. 'Parents and students challenge a statute requiring public schools to permanently display the Ten Commandments in every classroom in Louisiana,' the court stated. 'The district court found the statute facially unconstitutional and preliminarily enjoined its enforcement. We affirm.' The ruling cited the precedent set by the 1980 Supreme Court case Stone v. Graham, which struck down a similar Kentucky law as unconstitutional. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like The Top 25 Most Beautiful Women In The World Articles Vally Civil liberties groups hailed the decision as a crucial safeguard for religious freedom and diversity. 'This is a resounding victory for the separation of church and state and public education,' said Heather L. Weaver, senior staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union . 'Public schools are not Sunday schools, and they must welcome all students, regardless of faith.' Liz Hayes, spokesperson for Americans United for Separation of Church and State, added, 'All school districts in the state are bound to comply with the U.S. Constitution. Thus, all school districts must abide by this decision and should not post the Ten Commandments in their classrooms.' The law had been championed by Republicans, including former President Donald Trump , as part of a broader effort to introduce religious displays in public spaces. Supporters argued the Ten Commandments are foundational to U.S. law and history. However, opponents countered that the mandate would isolate non-Christian students and violate their rights. Live Events Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill expressed strong disagreement with the ruling, stating her intent to appeal to the full Fifth Circuit and, if necessary, the U.S. Supreme Court. The case now moves closer to possible Supreme Court review , which could set a national precedent for similar laws in other states.
