Paramakudi incident, thereby including the Chinthamani incident in Madurai district and in Ilayankudi of Sivagangai district

Paramakudi : A Letter to the Tamilnadu Chief Minister

Dear and Respected Madam,

i) To inquire into the causes and circumstances leading to the opening of fire resulting in death and injuries to many people on 11.09.2011 at Paramakudi in Ramanathapuram District and the subsequent law and order disturbances including large scale damages to public and private properties ;The 11^th of September, 2011 marked a scene of violations that is continuously being probed by political parties, Dalit organizations, human rights organizations, writers, academics and several others from Tamil Nadu and from throughout the country. The Hon’ble Chief Minister on the floor of the Legislative Assembly immediately after the incident announced the appointment of a Commission of Enquiry as per the Commission of Enquiry Act 1952 to be headed by Justice K. Sampath, a retired Judge of the Madras High Court. The terms of reference of the Commission of Enquiry in G.O. Ms. No. 845 dated 13^th September, 2011 read as follows:

(ii) To ascertain whether appropriate force was used as warranted by the circumstances and whether all prescribed formalities were observed before opening fire;

(iii) To ascertain whether there was any excess on the part of Police officials and if so, to suggest the action to be taken;

(iv) To recommend suitable measures to prevent the recurrence of such incidents in future;

The Commission is to submit its report within a period of two months from the date of publication of this notification, i.e. on or before 13^th November, 2011. A week has passed and there has been no information whatsoever in the public domain as regards the functioning of the Commission of Enquiry.

In the light of the above, I wish to draw your kind attention to certain facts which are not contested by the State in this issue.

· The first is that on 11^th September, 2011 there were 3 different incidents took place at three different places. In chronological order was the first police firing that took place not in Ramanathapuram, but in Madurai district in a place called Chinthamani wherein nobody was killed, but two persons were very seriously injured.

· Then came the Paramakudi police firing; and after that another police firing that took placed in Ilayankudi that falls within the jurisdiction of Sivagangai district.

Thus, what is referred to as the ‘Paramakudi incident’ by all political parties, Dalit organisations, writers, academicians and human rights organisations in all their reports are not actually what took place at Paramakudi alone, but the incidents that took place on the same day in relation to and connected with the Paramakudi incident, thereby including the Chinthamani incident in Madurai district and in Ilayankudi of Sivagangai district - both police firings on the same day.

· It is also to be pointed out that there were certain incidents that took place in connection with the said “Paramakudi incident” which started off as early as on 7^th September, 2011 with flex banners reading “Desiya Thalaivar, Deiva Thirumaganar Immanuel Sekaran’ – which translates in English as, ‘National Leader, Divine Descendent, Immanuel Sekaran’ being exhibited within the limits of the Paramakudi police station and the same resulting in a formal complaint at Paramakudi police station followed by peace talks initiated by DSP Ganesan and Inspector Sivakumar.

· The Hon’ble Chief Minister herself has on the floor of Assembly also alleged the depicting of certain wall writings derogatorily referring to a leader of another community in Muthuramalingapuram village as if the incident that lead to violence. On the 9^th of September, 2011 Mr. Palanikumar – a student, studying 12^th standard from Dalit community of Pacheri village in Ramanathrpuram district was brutally murdered while on his way home in the night with a friend and a well adjacent to Pachari village is alleged have also been poisoned.

· Finally the arrest of Mr. John Pandian at Thoothukudi was the incident that led to a road roko by a group of persons - whose exact number is in dispute - but the facts remain - that triggered of the incident, now popularly referred to as the ‘Paramakudi firing’.

When such are the background events from the 7^th to the 11^th September, 2011, all of them - namely the Chinthamani firing, Paramakudi firing and the Ilayankudi firing - it is completely unfortunate that the Public (Law and Order–F) Department of Government of Tamil Nadu in G.O. Ms. No. 845 dated 13^th September, 2011 has restricted its terms of reference for the Commission of Enquiry by Hon’ble Justice K. Sampath to only the police firing incident at Paramakudi of Ramanathapuram District. From the terms of reference mentioned above, it is clear that the Ilayankudi firing and the Chinthamani firing could not be covered and we are now informed that the District Administrations of Sivagangai and Madurai have or are in the process of ordering separate enquiries by their respective RDOs into the police firings that have taken place in their jurisdiction.

It is time therefore for us as a human rights organisation to bring to the kind attention of the Hon’ble Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu that after the passing of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 that has led to the constitution of the National Human Rights Commission of India and a State Human Rights Commission in Tamil Nadu only to attend to matters relating to human rights exclusively. The role therefore, of such Commissions of Enquiry becomes extremely limited. The Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 [PHRA] in Chapter III titled functions and powers of the Commission reads as follows :

Section 12: Functions of the Commission:

The Commission shall perform on any of the following function, namely,

(a) enquire suo motu or all petitions presented to it by a victim or any person on his behalf that are on the direction or order of any Court, into a complaint of

(i) violation of human rights or abatement there of; or

(ii) Negligence in provision of such violation by a public servant.

The avenue is open to the statutorily established National Human Rights Commission and State Human Rights Commission to enquire into human rights violations U/S 12(a)(i) & (ii) PHRA. When the Government, Central or State, requires the conduct of an urgent enquiry by a retired High Court Judge using the Commission of Enquiry Act and the purpose is only to find out the truth, the best way to do it when what is to be investigated in a matter falling within the definition of ‘human rights’ is not to take recourse to the Commission of Enquiry Act 1952 but to the PHRA 1993. Not taking recourse to the PHRA 1993 is to thwart the independent function of an institution like the NHRC created solely for the purpose of protecting human rights in this country. The NHRC and the SHRCs established in 20 States so far, are governed by International standards for NHRIs known as ‘Paris Principles’ which insist on their independence, on their jurisdiction and adequate powers, on their accessibility, on cooperation, on their efficiency and their transparency. The NHRC and SHRCs are further also bound by recent International Human Right standards and developments in the human rights arena. The reports that these Commissions generate U/S 20 and 28 of the Act mandate the NHRC and the SHRC to submit special reports at any time. The said section also mandates both the Central and State Governments, as the case may be, to cause such special reports to be laid before each house of Parliament or State Legislature with a memorandum of action taken.

In addition, the NHRC and the SHRC have independent investigation teams headed by an officer of the rank of the DGP of the State who heads the investigation at the NHRC as its Director General of Investigation and at the SHRC an officer of the rank of an ADGP who heads the investigation wing.

Therefore, a Government which requires an independent, urgent, efficient and transparent enquiry into the allegation of human rights violation - just what the Paramakudi incident is – calls for taking recourse to an enquiry by the NHRC comprising 5 members, 3 of whom are former Judges (Headed by a former Chief Justice of India, and comprising a former Judge of the Supreme Court of India and a former Chief Justice of a High Court as its Chair and Members) and two other Members with knowledge and experience in human rights. Thus an enquiry U/S 12(a) of the Protection of Human Rights Act conducted by the NHRC would be of far greater significance than an investigation conducted by a single Judge headed Commission of Enquiry under the Commission of Enquiry Act 1952.

In the present circumstances in Tamil Nadu, since the State Government is yet to appoint the Chairperson of the SHRC, taking recourse to the NHRC would be a better avenue for speedier remedy in seeking justice and for truth to prevail. Just as the Commission of Enquiry is only a recommendatory body, whose reports have to be placed on the floor of the Assembly, the special report of the NHRC also contains only recommendations and not ‘court directions’ to be placed on the floor of the Assembly. However, if the recommendations of the NHRC are not followed, the NHRC may U/S 18(b) “approach the Supreme Court or High Court concerned for such directions, orders or Writs or that Court deems necessary”. Thus the recommendations of the Commission of Enquiry cannot be put to implementation by the Commission. But on the contrary a recommendation by the NHRC can be implemented if they are fair by taking recourse to the Sec 18(b) of the PHRA. This is the advantage that the Hon’ble Chief Minister will have over the Commission of Enquiry Act by referring the Paramakudi incidents to the NHRC for enquiry and redressal.

It is therefore that People’s Watch working as the conscience of the larger human rights community in the State appeals to the Hon’ble Chief Minister hoping sincerely that the Hon’ble Chief Minister is only interested in seeking the truth and not in any way attempting to cover up any lapses that might have taken place by the instrumentalities of the State - in this case its police officials and makes the following recommendation. It fervently appeals to the Hon’ble Chief Minister, in the light of the deficiencies already pointed out as regards the scope of the enquiry and particularly in the context of evaluating the merits of an enquiry by the NHRC and the merits of an enquiry by a Commission of Enquiry, to kindly review the decision to appoint a Commission of enquiry. The Hon’ble Chief Minister, in the absence of a Chairperson in the Tamilnadu SHRC and the national importance of the human rights violation in question in Paramakudi, should be able to hand over this issue to the NHRC to step in and conduct an enquiry.

Since this has to be a time bound enquiry and the Hon’ble Chief Minister, may also express her wish that the same be conducted by the NHRC by a full Commission of the NHRC. The Hon’ble Chief Minister may also assure the NHRC that it is willing to pay the costs that the NHRC may incur in matters of travel, stay, conduct the enquiry, etc., which would have in any way spent for the Justice K.Sampath Commission of Enquiry.

People’s Watch hopes that the Hon’ble Chief Minister will appreciate the suggestion and immediately undertake measures to go ahead with the enquiry. Although the NHRC has suo motu powers to initiate enquiries and since the Hon’ble Chief Minister has, as early as on 13^th September, 2011, constituted this Commission of Enquiry, the NHRC is bound by Sec. 36(1) of the PHRA by which it shall not enquire into any matter which is pending before any other Commission duly constituted under any law. Thus, while the Justice K.Sampath Commission of Enquiry is in force, the NHRC is bound not to enquire into this matter and in order to allow the NHRC jurisdiction it is the State Government that will have to take these efforts to approach the NHRC in this regard.

Yours faithfully,

Henri Tiphagne

Executive Director, People’s Watch

AGRICULTURE

Pudukkottai district is predominantly an agricultural oriented district. Generally a dry and hot climate prevails in this district and this district's agricultural production depends mainly on the rainfall. The normal annual rainfall of Pudukkottai district is 922.8 mm. Out of which 52.2 mm is received in winter, 124.6 mm is received in hot weather period, 351.9 mm is received during South West Monsoon and 394.1 mm is received in North East Monsoon.

Irrigation

There are 5,385 Irrigation tanks available in this district out of which 172 tanks are system tanks fed by Grand Anaikat Channel and the remaining are rain fed tanks. There are about 55,137 wells in the district catering an area of 7791 Ha.

Major Crops

Paddy is the major crop of this district. 90000 Ha. of area is covered under paddy, out of which 135000 Ha. of area is fed with Cauvery Mettur Project through G.A. canal. The remaining area is well and tank fed. The present productivity level is 4.985 Mt. of Paddy /Ha.Other than Paddy, Groundnut is the major crop in this district which is mainly cultivated under rain fed condition. Groundnut is being cultivated in 36000 Ha. as rain fed crop and 8000 Ha. under irrigated condition Millet, Pulse, Cotton, Sugarcane, Gingelly are the other crops cultivated in this district.

Tourist places

• Government Museum, Thirukkokarnam, Pudukkottai
• New Pool(Pudhu Kulam)
• Sittannavasal (Famous for cave paintings)
• Kudimiyanmalai
• Thirumayam(Fort Uoomayan Kottai)
• Narthamalai
• Sastharkovil (Preserving Deities)
• Anna Pannai
• Avudaiyarkoil (Temple of Athmanatha, utsavamurti of the temple is Manikkavasakar)
• Thirugokarnam (It is the tutelary deity of Thondaiman rulers of Pudukkottai.)
• Kodumbalur (ancient place mentioned in Silappadikaram)
• Avur (The old chapel here was constructed in 1547 A.D. by Father John Venantius Bouchet)
• St. Santhanamatha church amaradakki.
• St. Sabastiyar church kolendiram.
• Setti kulam Alangudi.

VILLAGES IN PUDUKKOTTAI

There are 498 Panchayats in this district.Some important villages are:

• Arasadipatti
• Kulamangalam
• Maraamadakki
• Keeramangalam
• Arayappatti
• Pathampatti
• Mangadu
• Karumpirankottai
• Vettanvituthi
• Ponnanvitudhi
• Tholuvankaadu
• Vadakaatu
• Ammachathiram

Ariyur Erumbali Edundirapatti Alathur Edayapatti Eraposal Eswarankoil Ennai Kattakudi Kathavampati Kilikudi Kothadaramapuram Keelakurichi Kothirapatti Kudimiyanmalai Sathiyamangalam Sithanavasal Thatchampatti Thaliniji Thiruvengaivasal Thirunallur Thodaiyur Narthamalai Panampatti Mangudi Parambur Perumanadu Punginipatti Pungudi Amaradakki Kunnur Keelakudivettanur Karur Kundagavayal Keelachery Kalabam Kathiramangalam Kavadukudi Mimisal Pandipathiram Poovalur Palavarasan Puthambur Ponpethi Perunavalur Punniyavayal Ponnamangalam Sirumarudur Sathiyakudi Nattanipurasakudi Okkur Senganam Thondamanendal Thirupunavasal Thiruperundurai Thunjanur Theeyur Theeyadur Thalanur Vettanur Vilanur Velivayal Velvarai Veeramangalam Ammapattinam Bramanavayal Ediyathimangalam Edayathur Kanadu Karakathikottai Keelamanjakudi Kolendram Karakottai Kattumavadi Kottaipattinam Krishnajipattinam Manjakudi Manaloor Nerkuppai Mumpalai Manamelkudi Minnamozhi Perumaruthur Sathiyadi Seyyanam Thandalai Vellur Vichoor Thinayakudi Vettivayal Nelayur

HISTORY OF PUDUKKOTTAI

Many of the villages in the district are of ancient origin. The district was one of the homes of pre-historic man. The very large number of burial sites found in the northern and western parts of the district attest to this fact.

The history of Pudukkottai is an epitome of the history of South India. In and around Pudukkottai there are many vestiges of the oldest habitations of man and some of the lithic records known in the south. The Pandyas, Cholas, Pallavas, Haysalas, Vijaynagar and Madurai Nayaks ruled over this part of the country and fostered its communual organisations, trade and industries. They embellished it with temples and monuments of outstanding merit.

Augustus coin found in the Pudukottai Hoard

Sangam Tamil literature mentions some place names of the district. Oliyamangalam (Thirumayam Taluk) is called as Ollaiyur in Purananuru. It was the birthplace of the poet Ollaiyur Kilan Makan Perumchattan and Ollaiyur Thantha Budha Pandyan. Agananuru also mentions Ollaiyur. It seems to have been an important city of the Pandyas. Four other places also are found in the Sangam classics. They are Ambukkovil, the ancient Alumbil, referred to in Agananuru; Avur, the home of the poets Avurkilar, Avur Mulamkilar; Erichi, the ancient Erichalur which had been identified with Erichi Village in Pudukkottai - Aranthangi road (but, according to recent researches, a village near Illupur). It was probably the home of the poet Madalan Madurai Kumaranar. Avayapatti is traditionally associated with Avvaiyar, who is believed to have lived here for some time.^{[citation needed]}

Sangam period

This district was ruled by the Pandyas of the first empire during the Sangam period, but some part of its northern boundary area had been under the influence of the Cholas of Urayur. Some of the village names have prefixes like "killi" and "valavan", both of which are the titles of the Cholas.

The district shared the prosperity of the maritime trade of the Tamils. At Karukkakurichi was found a treasure trove of more than 500 Imperial Roman gold and silver coins, the largest ever recorded from a single hoard. This place lies in Alangudi taluk, a short distance north of Aranthangi and the adjoining old ports of Mimisal and Saliyur in the same area and Tondi further south. The Karukkakurichi hoard contained the issues of the Roman emperors and their queens, successively from Augustus (29 BCE - 14 CE) up to Vespasian (69-79).

The Karukkakurichi find would mark an important Indo-Roman trading centre, through which the inland trade route ran between the western and eastern ports during that time. This is indicated by a chain of such Roman coin hoard sites such as Korkai, Kilakkarai, and Alagankulam, all on the eastern sea coast. While Karukkakuruchi is a bit inland, it is not far away from ports like Mimisal. There are also few other sites of such finds in the east coast. While pointing out the exchanges of the exportable products for Roman gold and silver currency these would also indicate the places mentioned to have been active trade centres.

Kalabhras rule

From about the end of the 4th century until about the last quarter of the 6th, the district, like many other parts of Tamil Nadu, was under the Kalabhras. It must have come under the King Kurran, an inscription of whom has been found in Pulankurichi near Ponnamaravathi in the district.

Pandya empire

The next phase in the history of the district follows the overthrow of the Kalabharas by Kadungon in Pandya country about 590. The first Pandya empire inaugurated by Kadungon spread into the district. This is shown by the presence of inscriptions of the rulers of this dynasty in Kudumianmalai, Thirugokarnam and Sittannavasal (சித்தன்னவாசல்). The poem, "Pandimandala sathakam", states that Pandya land's northern frontier was the river Vellar. The Vellar that flows north of Pudukkottai town from ancient times was the traditional boundary separating the terrains of the Cholas and Pandyas. This dividing line formed the Konadu and Kanadu, on the north and south respectively.

Thus the district became the boundary between the Pandyas and Pallavas. The Pandyas and Pallavas carried on wars by proxy through their subordinate chiefs, the Mutharayars and Velirs. Among the Velirs the best known are the Irukkuvels of Kodumbalur. The Kodumbalur Velirs became a political buffer zone between the kingdoms of the Cholas and Pandyas and formed a family of nobility from which kings and other chiefs made matrimonial alliances.

Vijayalaya Choleswaram, Pudukkottai, built c. 850 C.E.

The period of three centuries between c. 600 and c. 900 relates to the reign of the Pallavas of Kanchi and Pandyas of Madurai who ruled over the entire Tamil Nadu with the boundary between their empires oscillating on either side of the river Kaveri. The bone of contention was Cholamandalam, the home of the Cholas and the fertile Kaveri delta: the granary of the south. As such, Cholamandalam was the cynosure of all powers contending for supremacy during the entire historical period. The Cholas themselves were in eclipse and hibernating only to revive again in the ninth century. When the Pallava power came to an end, the Pandyas held on for some time, ultimately to yield place to the waxing Chola power.

Though Mahendravarma Pallava (604-630) inherited from his victorious father Simhavishnu the Pallava empire that reached up to the bank of the Kaveri, Cholamandalam could not be retained by his immediate successor. It was over-run by the Pandyas of the further south. The tract north and south of river Vellar were in the hands of the Mutharayar chieftains, who, until their annihilation by the resurgent Chola line of Vijayalaya, owed allegiance to the alternating super powers. The Irukkuvelirs eventually became the firm allies of the Cholas.

Thus, one cannot expect to find early Pallava monuments, antiquities and inscriptions in Pudukkottai region; but only those of the contemporary Pandyas along with those of Mutharaiyars and Irukkuvelirs. Later the Pallavas wrested the tract from the hands of the Pandyas. The tract came under the Pallavas from the time of Nandivarman II (730-796) when the Pallavas power reasserted itself in Cholamandalam and the tract south of Kaveri, reaching a little south beyond Vellar, comprising the northern half of the Pudukkottai district. This period is thus marked by the presence of rock cut cave temples of the Pandyas and Mutharaiyars.

The available historical evidence from the first Pandya empire is rather scanty. The best known inscriptions are found at Sittannavasal from the reign of Srimara Srivallaba (851-862) and at Kudumianmalai from the reign of Kochadayan Ranadheeran or Sadayan Maran (c. 700-730). In the reign of Maravarman Rajasimha I (c. 730-760) a number of battles were fought against the Pallavas, one of the sites being Kodumbalur. Inscriptions from the reign of Nedunchadayan (c 768-816), the greatest king of the dynasty, are found in Thirugokarnam and Nirpalani. Of the reign of three successors of Srimara Srivallaba ending with Rajasimha II (c 920), who lost his kingdom to the resurgent Cholas, there are no reference about the Pandya rulers in the district.

The Pallava references to places and incidents in the district are equally scanty. The earliest references to historical events in the district are found in the Pandya records of the Velvikudi and Sinnamanur plates which say that Maravarman Rajasimha defeated Nadhivarman Pallava Malla at Kodumbalur. The inscriptions of his successors are found in Kunnandarkoil, Malayadipatti and Rasalipatti.

The age of Pallavas and Pandyas of the first empire, the Mutharaiyars and Irukkuvelirs was the age of Tamil Bhakthi Movement. The Tevaram mentions several temples in the district. The three Nayanmars from this district were, Idangalinayanar of Kodumbalur, Perumizhalai Kurumbanayanar associated with Devarmalai and Kulachirai Nayanar of Manamelgudi.

Jainism well flourished in Pudukkottai area up to 11th century. There are a number of Jaina vestiges in the district. The Buddhist vestiges in the district come from the former Thanjavur district. Buddha idols are found at Kottaipattinam and Karur.

With the exit of Pallavas from the political scene and the subsequent elimination of the Pandya power by the Cholas who established themselves at Thanjavur as their capital at the close of 9th century. By 11th century they extended their sway even beyond, Tamilakam. Pudukkottai among many other places come under them. Their rule extended until about the middle of 13th century, when the Pandyas staged a comeback.

Chola

Under Chola Vijayalaya, this district formed part of his dominion but perhaps fitfully. The notion that some temples of ninth century in the district, belong to early Chola period, is erroneous. The Pandyas still held power in the region. It was not until the reign of Parantaka-I (907-955). Vijayalay's second successor, that the Cholas conquered the entire Pandya land. The Kodumbalur chiefs helped Parantaka in his campaign and remained faithful to the Cholas thereafter.

The rule of Rajaraja Chola-I shows a brilliant part in the history of the district in common with that of Tamil Nadu. The full benefaction of the Chola rule is revealed in their inscriptions in the district. These inscriptions are of great value is showing how effectively local administration functioned in this part of Chola Kingdom.

Rajaraja-I appointed his son the viceroy of the conquered Pandya and Chera lands. The entire district formed part of the Chola kingdom until the last year of Kulothunga-III (1178–1218). At the death of Rajaraja-II and the succession of Rajadhiraja-II, the Chola power began to decline.

The Pandyas began to assert their independence from the time of Kulothunga-I. Towards the end of the reign of Raja Raja-II, Kulasekara one of the two contenders for Pandya throne pealed the Chola for help. His rival Parakrama turned towards Srilanka. Pudukkottai also become seat this civil war. Parakrama Babu the Srilanka king sent an army to assist Parakrama Pandya according to Culavamsa, the Sinhalese chronicle the Sinhalese army engaged itself in the war in the parts of the district and burnt down the three storeyed palace at Ponnamaravathi. The outcome of the civil war became disastrous to the Cholas. The history of the district after the fall of Cholas could not be told in detail for the records are comparatively minimal. The Pandyas of the second empire spread their influence in the district gradually.

The Pandya power reached its height in the district under Jatavarman Sundra Pandya-I and Jatavaraman vira Pandya-I the joint rulers. The inscription of Virapandya in Kudumianmalai, throws much light on his relationship with Srilanka and his kingdom across the seas. During the reign of Maravarman Kulasekara-I who acceded in 1268 A.D, Marcopolo the Venetian traveler visited Pandya country. Towards the end of Kulasekara's reign Jatavarman Virapandya-II and Jatavarman Sundara Pandya-II, the brothers quarreled. This led to a civil war in Pandya country resulting in political unrest and confusion.

Malikafur the general of Alaudeen Khalji the Sultan of Delhi took advantage of this and invaded Pandya country. This led to the incorporation of the Pandya country in the Delhi empire in subsequent years. A sultanate was established at Madurai. There are two inscriptions relating to the period of the Sultans of Madurai in the district, one at Rangiam (1332) and another at Panaiyur (1344).

The brief spell of Muslim rule (Sultanate of Madurai) at Madurai lasted for about 75 years and again there was political unrest and chaos and Pudukkottai region also shared the fate. Minor princes ruled small territories here and there. By about 1371. Kumarakampana, the Vijayanagar prince took over Madurai and the Sultanate came to an end. But the Pandya power did not survive on the Hindu conquest and slowly it ceased to be a historical force in the district.

The Hoysalas of Karnataka arrived in the southern part of Tamil Nadu and actively intervened Chola - Pandya feuds and soon they came to occupy the region on either banks of river Cauvery with the capital at Kannanur (modern Samayapuram). They established themselves in the area by the middle of 13th century and much of the Pudukkottai area was under their sway till the end of 13th century. The Vijayanagar Rayas centered in Hampi took over Madurai, from the Muslims when the whole of southern Karnataka, Andra and Tamil Nadu came under one rule - the Vijayanagar empire.

Under the Vijayanagar Sangama dynasty (1336–1485) the inscriptions in the district refer to many local chiefs such as Suraikudi, Perambur, Sendavanmangalam, Vanadaraiyar, Gangaiaraiyar and Thondaimans of Aranthangi. During the brief Suluva rule (1485-1505 A.D) Narasimha Raya the first Suluva emperor, during a tour of his dominions passed through Pudukkottai country on his way to Madurai. Vira Narasimha Nayak, the Tuluva usurper and the general of Saluva Narasimha-I, led a campaign against the Pandya chiefs and marched through Pudukkottai.

Princely flag of Pudukkottai

A great personality of the Tuluva dynasty (1505–1570) was Krishna Deveraya (1509–1529). He had visited Brahadamba Gokarnesa temple at Thirugokarnam on his way to Rameswaram and gifted many valuable presents to the temple. Under his successor eastern part of Pudukkottai district formed part of the Thanjavur kingdom for some time and the rest was under the Madurai Nayaks. The Thondaimans of Pudukkottai rose to power by about the end of 17th century.

The provincial viceroys of the Vijayanagar empire, the Nayaks of Madurai and Thanjavur asserted independence after the downfall of the empire. The Pudukkottai area thus came under the Nayaks of Madurai nominally and under the Thanjavur Nayaks frequently. The Thondaimans of Pudukkottai came to rule with full sovereignty over the Pudukkottai area from the middle of the 17th century till its amalgamation with the rest of India after Indian Independence in 1947.

The ancestors of the Pudukkottai ruling line of Thondaimans, are migrants from Thirupathi region in the Thondaimandalam, the northern stretch of the ancient Tamil Kingdom, along with the Vijaynagar army, which was in engagement in this part of territory in the early 17th century. It is probable that one among them got some lands assigned to him by the local Pallavarayar chieftain and settled down at Karambakudi and Ambukovil area, and became the chieftain of the area, later came to be called as the progenitor of Thondaimans of Pudukkottai ruling house. According to the legendary account found in a Telugu poem, Thondaiman Vamasavali, the Thondaimans belonged to Indravamsa and the first ruler was Pachai Thondaiman.

Avadi Raya Thondaiman, the successor of Pachai Thondaiman, with the favour of Venkata Raya III, the king of Vijayanagar got extended the land in his possession in the region and he was also conferred the title Raya. The Avadi Raya Thondaiman inherited Vijayanagar tradition and the Thondaimans of later period adopted it.

Thirumayam Fort

His son Ragunatha Raya Thondaiman came close to the Nayak of Thanjavur and Rangakrishna Muthuvirappa Nayak of Tiruchirappalli. He was appointed as the arasu kavalar of Tiruchirappalli. Vijaya Raghunatha Kilavan Sethupathi, the Sethupathi ruler of Ramanathapuram married Kathali Nachiar, the sister of Thondaiman. This marriage strengthened the ties between these dynasties. The Sethupathi presented the tract of land to the south of Vellar to the Thondaiman. Thus the Pudukkottai territory was enlarged. This account is called the Sethupathi origin of Pudukkottai country and expansion of Thondaiman rule. the Thondaiman's rule was established south of Vellar and Raghunatha Raya Thondaiman was in estimation to the status of a bigger territory by about 1686, and he ruled up to 1730.

About the time that Raghunatha Raya Thondaiman became the ruler of Pudukkottai, Namana Thondaiman, his brother became the chief of Kulathur Palayam (present Kulathur taluk area) with the blessings of the Nayak king Ranga Krishna Muthuvirappa of Tiruchirappalli (1682–1689) and Kulathur continued as separate "principality - with its ruler known as Kulathur Thondaiman " till about 1750 when it was annexed to Pudukkottai. Reghunatha also got some territories by victory, consolidating Pudukkottai rule roughly constituting the former Kulathur, Alangudi and Thirumayam taluks. The tract contained in these taluks, later came to be known as Pudukkottai State (Pudukkottai Samasthanam).

Todiman Raja in his Durbar, Pudukkottai, 1858

Vijaya Raghunatha Raya Thondaiman (1730–1769) was the second in the line of Thondaiman dynasty. During his period the whole of India come under the umbrella of the Mughals. The Nayakdoms of Ginjee, Thanjavur and Madurai were subjugated and became tributaries of the Mughal rule so also the smaller palayams which were under them. The Nizam of Hyderabad was appointed as the Mughal representative of South India, in turn the Nizam entrusted the Tamil Nadu region then known as Carnatic, to the Nawab of Arcot. Many of the tributory states did not remit the tributes regularly and such provinces were invaded by the Nawab's forces. Nothing like this happened in the case of Pudukkottai and was left undisturbed by the Nawab.

The war of succession to the office of Nawab of Carnatic, between Mohamad Ali and Chanda Sahib, became in due course a war of supremacy between the English and the French in South India which resulted in the Carnatic wars. The French supported the cause of Chanda Sahib and the English were on the side of Mohamed Ali. The war lasted for many years mainly around Tiruchirappalli. The Thondaiman was firmly on the side of the English at his time while the rulers like Thanjavur Marathas wavered. At last the English emerged as the masters. This firm help of the Thondaiman to the English was rewarded by the exemption of tribute by the victorious Nawab and later this was continued by the English. The Thondaiman's act of friendship towards English was continued by the next ruler Raya Raghunatha Thondaiman (1769–1789). Because of this the Thondaimans had to encounter the strong forces of Hyder Ali.

Pudukkottai (Tamil: புதுக்கோட்டை) is a town and a municipality in Pudukkottai district in the Indian state of Tamil Nadu. Pudukkottai District was carved out of Tiruchirappalli and Thanjavur districts in January 1974. It is the administrative headquarters of Pudukkottai District.The city of Pudukkottai is the district headquarters. It is also known colloquially as Pudhugai (Tamil: புதுகை).

Pudukkottai district is bounded on the northeast and east by Thanjavur District, on the southeast by the Palk Strait, on the southwest by Ramanathapuram and Sivaganga districts, and on the west and northwest by Tiruchirapalli District

The district has an area of 4663 km² with a coastline of 39 km. The district lies between 78° 25' and 79° 15' east longitude and between 9° 50' and 10° 40' of the north latitude.

Pongal called as Tamizhar Thirunaal (festival of Tamils) or Makara Sankranti elsewhere in India, a four-day harvest festival is one of the most widely celebrated festivals throughout Tamil Nadu. The Tamil language saying Thai Pirandhal Vazhi Pirakkum — literally meaning, the birth of the month of Thai will pave way for new opportunities — is often quoted with reference to this festival. The first day, Bhogi Pongal, is celebrated by throwing away and destroying old clothes and materials by setting them on fire to mark the end of the old and emergence of the new. The second day, Surya Pongal, is the main day which falls on the first day of the tenth Tamil month Thai (14 January or 15 January in western calendar). The third day, Maattu Pongal, is meant to offer thanks to the cattle, as they provide milk and are used to plough the lands. Jallikattu, a bull taming contest, marks the main event of this day. During this final day, Kaanum Pongal — the word "kaanum", means 'to view' in Tamil.

Districts of Tamil Nadu

The 32 districts of Tamil Nadu are listed below

Ariyalur district Chennai district Coimbatore district Cuddalore district Dharmapuri district Dindigul district Erode district Kanchipuram district Kanyakumari district Karur district Krishnagiri district Madurai district Nagapattinam district Namakkal district The Nilgiris district Perambalur district

Pudukkottai district Ramanathapuram district Salem district Sivaganga district Thanjavur district Theni district Thoothukudi district Tiruchirapalli district Tirunelveli district Thirupur district Thiruvallur district Thiruvannamalai district Thiruvarur district Vellore district Viluppuram district Virudhunagar district

MUSIC

The Kings of ancient Thamizhagam created sangams for Iyal Isai Nadagam (Literature, Music and Drama). Music played a major role in sangams. Music in Tamil Nadu had different forms. In villages where farming was the primary occupation, women who worked in the fields used to sing kulavai songs. Odhuvars, Sthanikars or Kattalaiyars offer short musical programmes in the temples by singing the devotional Thevaram songs. In sharp contrast with the restrained and intellectual nature of Carnatic music, Tamil folk music tends to be much more exuberant. Popular forms of Tamil folk music include the Villuppāṭṭu, a form of music performed with a bow, and the Nattuppurapattu, ballads that convey folklore and folk history. Some of the leading Tamil folk artists in the early 21st century are Pushpuvanam Kuppuswamy, Dr. Vijayalakshmi Navaneethakrishnan, Chinnaponnu, Paravai muniammal etc.

Carnatic music is the classical music form of Southern India. This is one of the world's oldest & richest musical traditions. The Trinity of Carnatic music Tyagaraja, Muthuswami Dikshitar and Syama Sastri were from Tamil Nadu. Thyagarajar Aaradhanai (worship) takes place every year in the month of Marghazhi in Thiruvaiyaru all carnatic musicians render their obesiance to Saint Thyagarajar by singing his compositions. The composers belonging to the Tamil Trinity, namely Muthu Thandavar (?1560 – ?1640 CE), Arunachala Kavi (1712–1779) and Marimutthu Pillai (1717–1787) composed hundreds of devotional songs in Tamil and helped in the evolution of Carnatic music. Today, Tamil Nadu has hundreds of notable carnatic singers and instrumentalists who spread this music all over the world^{[citation needed]}. Chennai hosts a large cultural event, the annual Madras Music Season during December–January, which includes performances by hundreds of artists all over the city.

In terms of modern cine-music, Ilaiyaraaja was a prominent composer of film music in Tamil cinema during the late 1970s and 1980s.^{[citation needed]} His work highlighted Tamil folk lyricism and introduced broader Western musical sensibilities to the South Indian musical mainstream. Tamil Nadu is also the home of the double Oscar Winner A.R. Rahman who has composed film music in Tamil, Telugu, Hindi films, English and Chinese films, was once referred to by Time magazine as "The Mozart of Madras".