Documents on anti-Hindi agitation wiped out on  Bhaktavatsalam’s order

The 1967 Assembly election catapulted the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) to power and effectively banished the Congress from ever emerging as a ruling party in Tamil Nadu. Ironically, the one person who appeared to have anticipated the DMK’s victory was the last Congress Chief Minister, M. Bhaktavatsalam. A month before losing power to the DMK, Bhaktavatsalam seemed to have prepared for his exit.

On February 24, 1967, he wrote a note to the Public Department, “Records connected with the anti-Hindi imposition agitation need not be kept. This may also apply to records maintained by the police.” The following day, the Public Department issued an order, “With reference to the Chief Minister’s orders stating that records connected with the anti-Hindi agitation need not be kept, the files listed below are submitted for orders regarding destruction.”

On February 24, 1967, Chief Minister M. Bhaktavatsalam wrote a note to the Public Department, ordering the destroying of the records connected with the anti-Hindi imposition agitation. 
| Photo Credit:
S. Shivaraj

The order listed 25 records treated as “secret”, including those relating to the arrest and detention of DMK leader M. Karunanidhi at the Borstal School at Palayamkottai, along with reports on his health condition; the detention of Tamil scholar Ilakkuvanar, also known as Avadayappan, Head of the Tamil Department at Thiagarajar College, Madurai; the detention of S.B. Adityan (Si. Pa. Adithanar), founder of Daily Thanthi; and the detention of student leader R. Sethu of Madurai Medical College.

The list also included records of detention in North Arcot, Chengalpattu, Coimbatore, Madurai, Kanniyakumari, The Nilgiris, Ramanathapuram, Salem, Thanjavur, Tiruchi, and Tirunelveli districts, as well as Madras city. The documents included writ petitions filed by A. Singaram of Riverbed Fort, Salem, and Joseph Pallipat of Madras city, challenging their detention.

After being informed that documents related to the anti-Hindi agitation had been destroyed, C.N. Annadurai, on March 31, 1967, sought an explanation from the Chief Secretary.  
| Photo Credit:
S. Shivaraj

“In accordance with the Chief Minister’s orders, these records were then destroyed and we are not able to retrieve them in any manner,” said A. Vennila, Assistant Editor at the Tamil Nadu Archives and Historical Research, who spent nearly one-and-a-half years compiling and digitising documents related to the anti-Hindi agitation. This comprehensive inventory of documents tracing the course of the anti-Hindi agitation in Tamil Nadu — including government orders and debates in the Madras State (later Tamil Nadu) Legislative Assembly and Legislative Council between 1927 and 1969 — was released by Chief Minister M. K. Stalin on December 22, 2025. Along with a descriptive index, the records are available on the Tamil Nadu Archives website.

Signed note

Within days of Bhaktavatsalam’s order, events took a historic turn that reshaped the political landscape of Tamil Nadu. In the 1967 election, the DMK came to power for the first time, and C.N. Annadurai assumed office as the Chief Minister. After being informed that documents related to the anti-Hindi agitation had been destroyed, Annadurai, on March 31, 1967, sought an explanation from the Chief Secretary. “From the press statements, I find that the previous Chief Minister [M. Bhaktavatsalam] was advised about the need for the destruction of the files connected with the anti-Hindi agitation. I would like to know the officers who advised the previous Chief Minister about it and whether those files could now be reconstructed,” he wrote in a signed note addressed to the Chief Secretary.

In his reply dated April 4, 1967, the Chief Secretary said, “It is clear from the former Chief Minister’s orders, and also from the absence of any notes from any officer in that connection, that the orders were those of the former Chief Minister himself and that no officer tendered any advice to him in that connection.”

The Chief Secretary further noted that Bhaktavatsalam’s instructions regarding the police records had been conveyed orally by the Deputy Secretary (Public) to the police. “It may be presumed, therefore, that the connected records with the police also would have been destroyed in pursuance of the former Chief Minister’s orders,” the note said.

On April 20, 1967, Annadurai, in a handwritten communication, wrote, “The Chief Secretary may explain how the order of the former Chief Minister was carried out, knowing that it was improper.” After examining the questions raised by the Chief Minister, the Secretary to the Law Department stated in an explanatory note that it was entirely outside the purview of a civil servant to question the order of the former Chief Minister. Any impropriety, if at all, lay at the political level and not at the official level, and there was no illegality or impropriety on the part of the officer who carried out the order, the note said.

The Chief Secretary also maintained that there was no mala fide intent on the part of the official who had executed Bhaktavatsalam’s directive. Subsequently, the matter was closed. However, the destruction of the records led to a lengthy debate in the Assembly. Responding to a question posed by A.K. Balakrishnan whether there was any time-frame fixed for retaining files before destroying them, Annadurai said that while some files could be retained for use, there were files that could be destroyed at any time, as required by Ministers. When A.K. Subbaiah  expressed his wish to retrieve the files and place them before the House, the Chief Minister said this was not possible, as they had been destroyed.

‘Activities of big men’

Annadurai did not agree with the suggestion of K.P.S. Mani that the government had forgiven those who had destroyed the files. “I do not relish the word ‘forgiveness’. We can only regret the activities of big men,” he said.

In response to DMK member A.V. P. Asaithambi’s question whether Ministers had the right to order the destruction of files or whether a committee of legal experts would be constituted to inquire into the matter, the Chief Minister said there was an established practice of retaining routine files for a particular period, as well as destroying secret documents “when the need arose”.

Leader of the Opposition P.G. Karuthiruman of the Congress wondered whether it was appropriate to describe the destruction of files as a conspiracy. Annadurai replied that even files related to Congress leaders had been destroyed after Independence, as those who read them later would be embarrassed. “But these files [related to the anti-Hindi agitation] would not have caused any trouble,” he said. “Files are related to persons who had the opportunity to form the government after the election. It is fair that those files were retained,” he added.

‘Subjected to harassment’

Annadurai said the files should have contained details of the car in which Karunanidhi was taken from Madras to Palayamkottai and what he was given on the way. “They would have had details not disclosed by Karunanidhi to me. They drove away the car without giving him even a cup of coffee. Karunanidhi, who was ailing, was subjected to harassment, and the files were apparently destroyed because, if I had read them, I would have been saddened,” he said.

He also promised to take appropriate action when H.V. Hande, of the Swatantra Party, wanted to know whether the government would table a copy of the entire proceedings relating to the investigation into the missing files. He also wondered whether there was a connection between the delayed announcement of Bhaktavatsalam’s election and the destruction of the files.

‘Right to destroy’

Responding to Congress leader K. Vinayagam, who wanted to know whether Annadurai agreed that Bhaktavatsalam had the constitutional and peremptory right to destroy any file he wished, he responded that when certain papers were destroyed, motives were bound to be suspected. “If every Minister is given the constitutional right to destroy every paper, we can have our Secretariat in a 12’ x 10’ room,” he remarked.

He also recalled a chapter on discipline, civil service mentality, and civic rights in Theory and Practice of Modern Government by Herman Finer. “The first duty that the civil servant is directed to do is that he should conscientiously discharge his office and all the duties directly pertaining thereto, in accordance with the Constitution and laws, to obey the official orders of his superiors in so far as they are not contradictory to the law, and to behave worthily of the respect accorded to his office,” Annadurai said, quoting the Law Department.

After Annadurai pressed the issue, the Chief Secretary issued an order to pursue Mr. Hande’s demand for summoning all officers concerned, conduct a detailed inquiry, and ascertain exactly what the contents of the destroyed files had been. The Chief Secretary also agreed to pursue Communist leader N. Sankaraiah’s question whether the government would inquire into the incidents and inform the House of the results.

Ms. Vennila said the debates preserved in these records contain many notable views that remain relevant even today. In particular, discussions were held on whether a third language should be introduced in the school curriculum, the necessity of such a requirement, and the psychological pressure such policies might place on students. Lengthy deliberations on these questions took place during the tenure of Avinashilingam Chettiar as the Education Minister. There were also debates on why a South Indian language could not be adopted as the third language in place of Hindi, she said.

A close reading of these records shows the anti-Hindi agitations of the mid-1960s marked an unprecedented student uprising in Tamil Nadu. Government documents indicate that the protests were led primarily by students, as evident from police reports submitted to the higher authorities on demonstrations held in front of colleges, she said.

Wealth of valuable information

A total of 649 records related to the anti-Hindi agitation, running to 20,875 pages, have been compiled. They include 18,229 pages comprising 302 Government Orders, 1,831 pages of Madras Legislative Assembly debates, and 815 pages of Madras Legislative Council debates. These records contain a wealth of valuable information, and their compilation and digitisation make them far more accessible to researchers and the public.

“The Tamil Nadu Archives and Historical Research houses more than 40 crore records. We are in the process of segregating these records thematically. One such thematic segregation is the anti-Hindi agitation. I hope this effort will help the younger generation understand this struggle better,” said S. Malarvizhi, Commissioner, Tamil Nadu Archives and Historical Research.