Since the days of the British East India Company in the 17th century CE, Chennai has been the focal point of the Tamil territory. The territory has undergone changes over the years but the city has maintained its character — the central figure. In the last 40-and-odd years, there were attempts at different points of time to find a second or an alternative capital. Eventually, all those moves met with one end — failure.
It was in December 1980 that the then Chief Minister M.G. Ramachandran, who had begun his second stint as the Chief Minister only six months earlier, called upon people of the State to do “loud thinking” regarding a new capital, according to materials provided by The Hindu Archives. Addressing an event in Madurai as a prelude to the fifth edition of the World Tamil Conference in January 1981, MGR, who then represented Madurai (West) in the Assembly, indicated Tiruchi and Madurai as his options. Even though he continued to float the idea, his bête noire” and DMK president, M. Karunanidhi had dismissed it as one of “diversionary tactics.”
In April 1983, the then Finance Minister V.R. Nedunchezhian said the government was considering making Tiruchi the second capital, by shifting some of its establishments and regional offices. In June 1985, he acknowledged that MGR had felt it was a “difficult proposition” to convert any other city to the status of a capital in view of the huge cost factor.
In November 1995, the then Union Minister of State M. Arunachalam, mooted again the proposal of choosing Tiruchi as the “second capital.” Seven years later, Jayalalithaa, as Chief Minister, announced that her government had planned to raise a 2,000-acre administrative capital near Mamallapuram — the stretch involving Thiruvidanthai and Thaiyur villages, off East Coast Road. This time too, after kindling a controversy, the issue died down in due course of time. Three years ago, the debate got revived but it fizzled out later.
Asked why Chennai has been able to retain its critical importance, T. Udhayachandran, an administrator who handles the subjects of Finance and Archaeology in the State government, says “Chennai represents a fine blend of culture, history, commerce and industry. It is uniquely positioned.”
Emphasising that a city has to keep on reinventing itself to stay relevant, the official points out that post-1991 [economic reforms], a city has to have the ability to generate employment, which Chennai possesses in adequate measure. Explaining how the British were different from Indian rulers in the approach towards Chennai, Mr. Udhayachandran points out that the former had made use of the position of Chennai as a port city to the maximum as they had commercially exploited maritime trade.
