Efforts being made to paint me with 'saffron', says Rajinikanth

Chennai, Nov 8: Superstar Rajinikanth on Friday said the BJP has not invited him to join the party, but insisted efforts were being made to paint him with "saffron", the ideological colour the national party is associated with.

He accused a section of media and "some persons" with making such attempts.

The BJP said it has never claimed the actor was willing to join the party, while the DMK said it was not aware whom the actor was signalling to with his statement on being painted with saffron hues.

On Thursday, Rajinikanth met reporters twice within a span of few hours to talk on issues including his being "painted" with saffron.

Attempts were being made to paint both himself and Thiruvalluvar with saffron, the veteran star said referring to the recent controversy surrounding the Tamil saint-poet.

When asked about senior BJP leader Pon Radhakrishnan's recent meeting with him and the former's repeated assertions that the actor should join the party, Rajinikanth said no such invitation has been made to him.

"No offer has been made (from BJP to join the party)..
definitely not," he said. "Attempts are being made to paint me with BJP colour..

trying to paint me with saffron like Thiruvalluvar was done with.. Neither Thiruvalluvar nor me will get trapped," he said with a big laugh.

Later, when reporters raised the matter with him for a second time, Rajinikanth said "some people, some media--they are trying to colour me as a BJP man."

"But definitely it is not true," he said. Asked if it was the media or BJP that painted him in saffron colour, he said "some persons."

While any party could be happy if he joins it, only he should take a call on the matter, the actor said, adding "but it is wrong to say they are dependent on me."

On November 1, the BJP's Tamil Nadu unit had on its Twitter handle written a couplet from Thiruvalluvar's classic "Thirukkural," questioning the use of education if the Almighty was not worshipped.

Tagging the couplet, the saffron party targeted the Dravidar Kazhagam, DMK and the Left parties for allegedly deriding God and for berating believers and questioned "what is the use of their education."

Also, the party had posted a picture of Thiruvalluvar in saffron robes with sacred ash on his forehead, with the issue leading to a spat between the BJP and the DMK and other opposition parties.

When asked about this episode, Rajinkanth said while many public issues warranted media attention, there was focus on such matters which was "silly".

He said the state BJP had only put up a picture of Thiruvalluvar with saffron robes in its official Twitter handle and that it did not want this to be done all over.

"You (media) had blown up the matter.. there are so many people's issues to be discussed, but you made this big," he said, adding, "it is silly."

Further, Thiruvalluvar was a sage beyond boundaries of religion and caste, he said.

However, the saint-poet was a "believer" and not a "non-believer," which was evident from his Thirukkural couplets, he said.

Responding to Rajinikanth's statement, the BJP said it was its democratic right to meet somebody.

If anybody is interested they were "allowed and invited to join," BJP National General Secretary P Muralidhar Rao said, adding a number of celebrities and eminent persons all over the country including from Tamil Nadu were joining its ranks.

"Now it is very clear that there should not be any misconception. Anywhere in that state, we had never told Rajinikanth--film star, artiste, eminent person who has contributed to the entertainment industry of the entire country--never we told he had joined BJP. Never we told he is willing to join BJP," he told reporters here.

BJP was not interested in such "speculations," he added.

DMK Treasurer Durai Murugan, in his response to the superstar's remarks that attempts were being made to portray him as a BJP man, said it was Rajinikanth's opinion.

However, Durai Murugan said he was not aware whom Rajinikanth was sending a message to in this regard.

Meanwhile, responding to a question the slowing economic growth, Rajinikanth said the government should do whatever it takes to address it.

Asked about his stand on the Centre's demonetisation excercise in 2016, he said he had made his stand known about it "long back."

Last year, he had said the implementation of demonetisation by the Centre was flawed.

On the Ramjanma Bhoomi issue, on which the Supreme Court is likely to give its order any time, he appealed to the people to maintain peace irrespective of the ruling.

To a question, he said there was still a "vacuum" for a powerful leadership in the state, reiterating his remarks made last year in the wake of the death of chief minister J Jayalalithaa in 2016 and the illness of then DMK President M Karunanidhi, who died in August 2018.

However, DMK shot back at Rajinikanth's statement, saying its party leader MK Stalin has already filled up that vacuum.

"Stalin has filled up that vacuum a long time back," Durai Murugan said.

Comments

Add new comment

Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.

‘Pay the worker before his sweat dries’: Madras High Court cites Prophet Muhammad’s teaching while ordering settlement of dues

News Network

December 21,2025

Invoking the teachings of Prophet Muhammad—“pay the worker before his sweat dries”—the Madras High Court has directed a municipal corporation to settle long-pending legal dues owed to a former counsel. The court observed that this principle reflects basic fairness and applies equally to labour and service-related disputes.

Justice G. R. Swaminathan made the observation while hearing a petition filed by advocate P. Thirumalai, who claimed that the Madurai City Municipal Corporation failed to pay him legal fees amounting to ₹13.05 lakh. Earlier, the High Court had asked the corporation to consider his representation. However, a later order rejected a major portion of his claim, prompting the present petition.

The court allowed Thirumalai to approach the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) and submit a list of cases in which he had appeared. It also directed the corporation to settle the verified fee bills within two months, without interest. The court noted that the petitioner had waited nearly 18 years before challenging the non-payment and that the corporation could not be fully blamed, as the fee bills were not submitted properly.

‘A Matter of Embarrassment’

Justice Swaminathan described it as a “matter of embarrassment” that the State has nearly a dozen Additional Advocate Generals. He observed that appointing too many law officers often leads to unnecessary allocation of work and frequent adjournments, as government counsel claim that senior officers are engaged elsewhere.

He expressed hope that such practices would end at least in the Madurai Bench of the High Court and added that Additional Advocate Generals should “turn a new leaf” from 2026 onwards.

‘Scandalously High Amounts’

While stating that the court cannot examine the exact fees paid to senior counsel or law officers, Justice Swaminathan stressed that good governance requires public funds to be used prudently. He expressed concern over the “scandalously high amounts” paid by government and quasi-government bodies to a few favoured law officers.

In contrast, the court noted that Thirumalai’s total claim was “a pittance” considering the large number of cases he had handled.

Background

Thirumalai served as the standing counsel for the Madurai City Municipal Corporation for more than 14 years, from 1992 to 2006. During this period, he represented the corporation in about 818 cases before the Madurai District Courts.

As the former counsel was unable to hire a clerk to obtain certified copies of judgments in all 818 cases, the court directed the District Legal Services Authority to collect the certified copies within two months. The court further ordered the corporation to bear the cost incurred by the DLSA and deduct that amount from the final settlement payable to the petitioner.

Comments