(As Tamil Nadu gears up for the Assembly polls, every week, Arun Janardhanan decodes the electoral trends, political signals, and campaign moves shaping the contest.)
In 1963, when the Congress was losing its organisational vitality, K Kamaraj, then the party’s national president, proposed what came to be known as the Kamaraj Plan. The idea was simple but radical: senior leaders holding powerful government posts should resign and return to full-time party work, allowing younger leaders to take over governance and electoral politics. Under that plan, several Union Ministers and Chief Ministers stepped down to strengthen the organisation.
Six decades later, Tamil Nadu may witness a different version of that unfold. After months of negotiations with allies, including the Congress, Chief Minister M K Stalin appears to have largely settled the alliance arithmetic for the coming Assembly elections. But the more difficult conversation may now lie within his party, DMK.
It is a question that every dominant party eventually confronts: what to do with its veterans. For Stalin, the challenge is unusually sharp. Several senior ministers and party heavyweights are already in their 70s, while Durai Murugan, born in 1938, is now in his mid-80s and remains one of the oldest serving ministers in the country. Others such as K N Nehru (born 1952) and M R K Panneerselvam (born 1957) represent the party’s old guard.
At the same time, the Cabinet also includes younger figures. Deputy CM Udhayanidhi Stalin, born in 1977, is in his forties, highlighting the generational contrast within the government. The real tension inside the DMK is therefore not ideological but generational. Several senior leaders who built the party over decades wish to contest again and, in some cases, are also seeking Assembly tickets for their children.
The question for Stalin is simple to frame and difficult to answer: will he say no?
The DMK has long been a highly centralised party shaped by strong leaders: C N Annadurai, M Karunanidhi, and now Stalin. Over the decades, it has built a powerful internal hierarchy, with influential district secretaries commanding enormous local authority. That structure also created a perception problem: critics often portrayed the party as one where local strongmen could bend institutions. Whether true or exaggerated, the image stuck.
One of the notable shifts during Stalin’s tenure was the softening of that reputation. Unlike the combative tone of earlier Dravidian politics, Stalin cultivated a patient, accessible, and coalition-minded style. His politics emphasised alliances over confrontation, helping the DMK rebuild a broad front after 2019 and attract figures such as Senthil Balaji and, more recently, O Panneerselvam. Yet, expanding alliances outside the party may prove easier than redistributing power within it.
The age question
Many of the DMK’s most experienced leaders belong to a generation that entered politics in the 1970s and 1980s. Several are now well past seventy. Among them is Durai Murugan, 86, one of the oldest sitting legislators in India. He has contested about a dozen Assembly elections since 1971 and has won 10 times — seven from Katpadi and two from Ranipet — with defeats in 1984 and 1991. A long-time loyalist of Karunanidhi, he remains one of the DMK’s most recognisable political faces.
But age is now an unavoidable factor. Murugan recently underwent hip replacement surgery and party insiders say mobility has become difficult. Yet, he is determined to contest again. As one senior DMK functionary put it, the veteran believes he can still win “sitting inside his car”. Another insider joked that he had been “torturing Stalin every day for a ticket,” a reminder that political stamina sometimes outlasts physical stamina.
He is not alone. The list of senior leaders seeking tickets — sometimes for their children — is long. Among them is E V Velu, the Public Works Minister and a multiple-term MLA from Tiruvannamalai who is a confidant of the CM and commands a strong network in northern Tamil Nadu.
M R K Panneerselvam, the Agriculture Minister from Cuddalore, is believed to be backing the rise of his son. In southern Tamil Nadu, K K S S R Ramachandran, 79, the Revenue and Disaster Management Minister, is another senior leader keen to secure an extra ticket for his family. In the north, Ranipet MLA and minister R Gandhi is also said to be pushing for a seat for his son. Minister for Natural Resources S Regupathy is also learnt to be seeking a seat for his son.
Together, these ambitions are unfolding in a crowded field. More than 15,000 ticket applications have been submitted ahead of the elections, including not only sitting legislators but also the political heirs of several senior ministers. For Stalin, the question is no longer about loyalty but about managing succession in the party hierarchy.
Is S Plan a possibility?
Dynastic politics is hardly new to the DMK. Preceding decades saw examples such as Veerapandi S Arumugam and his son both holding Assembly seats during the Karunanidhi era. Today, however, the political environment has changed. Urbanisation, social mobility and digital media have reshaped voter expectations. The emergence of new political formations, most notably actor Vijay’s Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam, has further intensified the demand for fresh faces. For the DMK leadership, it may be difficult to ignore this shift.
The DMK has never formally adopted a mechanism such as the “Margdarshak Mandal” —a symbolic advisory council for senior leaders that the BJP established after effectively moving them away from active politics — but some party strategists believe the moment may have arrived. Informal party discussions suggest that leaders above a certain age could be encouraged to shift toward organisational responsibilities: mentoring younger cadres, strengthening district structures and guiding policy debates. In effect, it will resemble a Dravidian version of Kamaraj’s K Plan, an S Plan, so to speak.
For Stalin, the dilemma is both political and emotional. Many of these veterans were among his father’s closest associates. Several helped sustain the party during its years in the Opposition. Asking them to step aside risks internal resentment.
Yet, failing to renew the party could create a different problem. Anti-incumbency inevitably affects several ministers and MLAs. While Stalin himself appears to remain popular across social groups, local dissatisfaction with sitting legislators is uneven but real. A carefully calibrated generational shift could help neutralise that anti-incumbency. But such a shift would require unusually firm decisions.
Kamaraj’s Plan was controversial, yet it temporarily revitalised the Congress by redistributing power between government and organisation. The DMK may now be approaching a comparable moment. Could Stalin introduce his S Plan, telling the figures who shaped the party’s history that their electoral chapter has ended? Or will the DMK’s traditional culture of loyalty and accommodation prevail?
The questions remain unresolved for now. But within the party, the debate has begun and it may well become the most consequential internal decision the DMK chief will make since he took charge of the party in 2017.