The ongoing rift between Keralam and Karnataka over the proposed bifurcation of the Mangaluru region from the Palakkad Railway Division, has revived memories of the former’s opposition to a bifurcation of the same Division nearly 20 years ago.
Back then, the Railway Board had planned to bifurcate the Palakkad Division and create the Salem Railway Division in Tamil Nadu. At one point, the issue had reached a flashpoint with Tamil Nadu’s politicians announcing a blockade of trains from and to Kerala (as the State was known then) passing through Salem.
During the fag end of 2005, the Railway Ministry had in-principle agreed to the long term demand from Tamil Nadu to create a Railway Division headquartered in Salem. This project was originally conceived in the 1960s by S.V. Ramaswamy, the then Deputy Minister for Railways. It, however, came closer to fruition only during the time R. Velu of the PMK who served as the Union Minister of State for Railways in the Congress-DMK inclusive UPA-I regime.
R Velu, then Union Minister of State for Railways, at Vijayawada on March 23, 2008
| Photo Credit:
Ch. Vijaya Bhaskar
Political parties and industrialists in Tamil Nadu had hailed the decision to create the Salem Railway Division comprising of the Salem, Erode, Namakkal, Coimbatore and Dharmapuri regions, which were until then attached to the Palakkad Railway Division.
However, in Kerala, the move triggered strong protests. The then CPI-M Kerala secretary Pinarayi Vijayan (who later became Chief Minister) opposed the move alleging “Kerala, which was located far away from the national capital, was being continuously ignored.” Veliyam Bhargavan, then CPI state secretary, alleged the Centre was “succumbing to the pressure groups in Tamil Nadu and Karnataka,” and scuttling railway development in Kerala.
Veerapandi S. Arumugam. File
| Photo Credit:
S. Siva Saravanan
More than a year later, in February 2007, as the proposal was taking concrete shape, Kerala Chief Minister V.S. Achuthanandan strongly conveyed his opposition to it. Tamil Nadu Agriculture Minister Veerapandi S. Arumugam, who was a strongman in Salem, hit back saying, “those in power in Kerala should realise their responsibility to a nation before adopting a ‘confrontationist’ attitude towards Tamil Nadu, their neighbours.”
According to a report in The Hindu, Arumugam was apprehensive that such “ill-conceived” approach would usher in negative consequences on the inter-State affairs in a democratic set-up. He argued Tamil Nadu had just sought a new Railway Division with headquarters at Salem for its development. “The route kilometres that traverse through Tamil Nadu alone have been included in the new division. No one can deny our rights. And we have also never opposed the continuation of Palakkad Division in Kerala,” he said adding Achuthanandan’s opposition was “unjustifiable” and amounted to “interference” in the affairs of Tamil Nadu. He warned, “Any irresponsible statement and antagonist move will only affect the people of both the States.”
BJP workers staging a dharna in front of the Central Railway Station at Thiruvananthapuram in Kerala on November 1, 2007, in protest against the inauguration of Salem railway division
| Photo Credit:
C. Ratheesh Kumar
Amid this friction, Railway Minister Lalu Prasad told the Lok Sabha that the Salem Division will not be inaugurated until differences between Kerala and Tamil Nadu were not resolved. This triggered Arumugam to announce an indefinite blockade of all trains to and from Kerala passing through Salem from August 25, 2007, until the Centre clears the proposed inauguration of the new Division. “We will not allow any train bound for Chennai, New Delhi and other destinations from the Palghat division of Kerala to go via Salem. We will block Kerala-bound trains too,” he said.
Meantime, the People’s Forum for Natural Justice of Ottapalam in Kerala moved the Supreme Court challenging the legality of the Railway Ministry’s decision to bifurcate the Palakkad Division. However, the court refused to pass any orders saying the dispute can be sorted out politically. The apex court’s decision came after the Kerala Chief Minister’s counsel submitted that he had taken up the issue with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. The latter had assured it would be resolved by convening a meeting of the Chief Ministers of Kerala and Tamil Nadu.
Activists of Periyar Dravidar Kazhagam and Rail Passengers Welfare Association blocking a Thiruvananthapuram-bound train at Tiruppur railway station on February 20, 2007, protesting against the attitude of Kerala government and MPs in formation of Salem Railway Division.
| Photo Credit:
M. Balaji
In August that year, the issue saw raised tempers in the Rajya Sabha leading to a brief adjournment, and concerns over the impact of smooth running of trains, in the Lok Sabha following the announcement of an agitation in Tamil Nadu.
“Trouble arose in Rajya Sabha during Question Hour when Tiruchi Siva (DMK) wanted to know the inauguration date for the Salem division. As Minister of State for Railways R. Velu, Lok Sabha Member from Tamil Nadu, rose to reply, A. Vijayaraghavan (CPI-M) and other Kerala MPs protested and said the supplementary was unrelated to the main question which was connected with new rail lines….The issue also came up in Lok Sabha after Question Hour when Suresh Kurup (CPI-M) sought Home Minister Shivraj Patil’s intervention in ensuring smooth running of Kerala-bound trains through Salem. Referring to the threat issued by political parties in Tamil Nadu to block Kerala-bound rail traffic passing through Salem from Saturday if the Centre does not clear the inauguration of the proposed divisional headquarter on September 14, Mr. Kurup said this would cause unnecessary hardship to Malayalees travelling in large numbers to their native place this weekend for Onam,” The Hindu reported.
Then Kerala Chief Minister V.S. Achuthanandan calling on Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in March 2007
| Photo Credit:
V. Sudershan
The following month, the Kerala Chief Minister, who was in Delhi, to pursue his State’s case with the Prime Minister and Railway Minister, told journalists, “We are not against the formation of the Salem railway division. We only want that it should not make the residual Palakkad division economically unviable. We also hope that the people of Tamil Nadu will not object to the creation of a west coast railway zone with headquarters in Kerala.” He reasoned Kerala had been protesting against the proposal to form Salem division on the ground that it would be bigger than the Palakkad division, from which it was being hived off.
A view of the temporary office of the Salem Railway Division on October 30, 2007, two days ahead of its inauguration
| Photo Credit:
P. Goutham
Eventually, all opposition was overcome and the Salem Railway Division formally came into being on November 1, 2007. The Division had a total route length of 862 km, including 623 km of Palakkad Division. As there was opposition from Kerala to shifting Coimbatore and Erode junctions to the Salem division, the Pollachi Junction-Palghat Junction and Pollachi Junction-Kinnattukkadavu Junction were attached to the Palakkad Division.
Political hostilities revived between Kerala and Tamil Nadu in 2012 amid reports of a move to shift the Salem Railway Division from the Southern Railway’s jurisdiction and merge it with the Palakkad Railway Division to form a new division. Finally in March 2013, the Southern Railway General Manager Rakesh Mishra ruled out any such merger ending the speculations.
Published – August 28, 2026 04:23 pm IST
