NEW DELHI, 2 October 2007 — A fresh row over judicial intervention in politics erupted yesterday with the Supreme Court threatening imposition of federal rule in the southern Tamil Nadu state on the ground of the Dravida Munnettra Kazhagam (DMK)-led state government allegedly violating its order against calling a strike.

On Sunday, the Supreme Court ruled the DMK call for the strike illegal and unconstitutional and warned the state government against observing one. With deserted roads and closed shops in Tamil Nadu giving the impression of a strike being observed yesterday, the DMK’s rival, the All India Anna Dravida Munnettra Kazhagam (AIADMK), brought this to attention of the court. The bench, including Justices B.N. Aggarwal and P. Sathasivam said: “If there is no compliance with our order, it is a complete breakdown of the constitutional machinery. We will then have to direct the government to impose president’s rule.”

If the Tamil Nadu government did not comply with its order, the bench said that it would not hesitate to summon the state chief secretary.

On being apprised of the situation by AIADMK counsel, the bench said: “You can file a contempt petition.”

Counsel for the DMK pointed out that party leaders were only on protest fast and some trade unions were involved in observing a strike. “What is the government doing when some unions are trying to perpetuate the bandh (strike)? The unions are being allowed to strike and the government is not doing anything,” the bench said.

While the court pointed out that it was not passing any order, it warned the state government to comply with its order in letter and spirit.

When asked about the probability of the federal government complying with Supreme Court’s directive of imposition of president’s rule in Tamil Nadu, a government minister categorically ruled this out.

“We will do nothing to hurt the Tamil Nadu government. We are committed. They (DMK) are part of our government. We will not disturb the state government remotely, directly or explicitly,” Information and Broadcasting Minister Priya Ranjan Dasmunsi said. The issue was not discussed at a meeting of the Cabinet yesterday, he said.

Describing DMK chief and Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi as “one of the stalwarts” of not just the DMK but the entire country, he said that his being on fast did not constitute a violation of the court order. “This is a nonviolent response, showing respect to Mahatma Gandhi’s ideals a day ahead of his birth anniversary,” Dasmunsi said.

In Chennai, Karunanidhi cut short his fast called to demand early completion of the Sethusamudram canal. Having sat on a dais with some 35 ministers and leaders of DMK and allies, the 83-year-old chief minister abruptly ended what was to have been a daylong fast after a little over three hours when he was told that the Supreme Court was furious that its order banning a state-sponsored strike had been disobeyed.

A DMK leader told reporters at the protest site near the cricket stadium in Chepauk area that Karunanidhi was not feeling well and that he had to meet a doctor. A visibly rattled Karunanidhi clarified to Sun TV as he left that he had not taken on the Supreme Court.

“I am not against the Supreme Court. I have not violated any law. The Supreme Court has not banned us from going on fast,” he said in remarks clearly directed at the court. He then drove straight to his office and later went home.

The Bharatiya Janata Party said the Tamil Nadu government had lost the constitutional right to stay in power.