In a politically significant development, the BJP has invited nominations for the post of Tamil Nadu state president, just ahead of Union Home Minister Amit Shah’s visit to Chennai. The move has sparked renewed attention on the party’s internal dynamics and potential revival of ties with its former ally, the AIADMK.

The BJP’s Tamil Nadu unit, hours before Shah’s arrival on Thursday night, announced that contenders for the top state post must have at least ten years of party membership. This condition effectively excludes the current state chief K Annamalai from contesting, as he joined the party in 2020 and became state president in 2021 — within 11 months of joining.

Although the rule existed earlier, a senior party leader clarified that its enforcement depends on the party’s high command, indicating potential flexibility.

Shah’s Tamil Nadu visit and key meetings

Amit Shah’s trip marks his first to Tamil Nadu since the BJP and AIADMK restarted informal alliance talks in March. During the visit, the Home Minister is expected to meet senior BJP leaders and press representatives, followed by a discussion with RSS ideologue and Thuglaq editor S Gurumurthy. Annamalai also met Gurumurthy on Thursday evening at the latter’s Mylapore residence.

Annamalai confirmed Shah’s visit, stating, “He often comes to take ground-level feedback. As of now, I’m only authorised to say that he is coming and will leave tomorrow evening.”

Alliance talks in focus ahead of 2026 polls

The timing of the leadership selection and Shah’s visit has intensified speculation about alliance talks with the AIADMK, which broke ties with the BJP in 2023, blaming Annamalai’s remarks on Dravidian party founders. AIADMK leader Edappadi K Palaniswami (EPS) had met Shah in New Delhi on March 26, sparking rumours of reconciliation ahead of the 2026 assembly elections.

Though Shah later hinted at a potential alliance via a post on X, EPS denied any specific discussions, saying decisions will be made closer to the elections.

Besides Annamalai, the membership clause also affects another potential contender — Tirunelveli MLA Nainar Nagendran, who joined the BJP in 2017. Despite being the party’s floor leader in the state assembly, his eight-year tenure falls short of the eligibility mark.

Political tensions with ruling DMK escalate

Amit Shah also used the visit to attack the DMK-led government, accusing it of corruption. “Tamil Nadu people are fed up with DMK’s corruption. That’s why DMK is using the delimitation issue as a cover-up,” he posted on X. The DMK hit back, with organising secretary RS Bharathi accusing the BJP of misusing federal agencies to target opposition parties.

Bharathi noted that Shah had also levelled similar corruption allegations during his 2018 visit — a time when the AIADMK, now BJP’s former ally, was in power.

Actor-turned-politician Kangana Ranaut has stirred controversy in Himachal Pradesh after alleging unusually high electricity bills at her Manali residence. The BJP Lok Sabha MP from Mandi claimed she received a bill of Rs 1 lakh despite not living at the house, triggering a sharp exchange with the state’s Public Works Department (PWD) Minister Vikramaditya Singh.

Speaking at a public meeting in her constituency recently, Kangana Ranaut criticised the Congress-led state government for inflated electricity bills. A video of her remarks went viral on social media, where she claimed, “I received an electricity bill of Rs 1 lakh for one month for my house in Manali. I don’t even live there. It is such a miserable condition.”

She further questioned the massive rise in billing, claiming her earlier charges of Rs 5,000 had surged to Rs 80,000. “Am I running a factory in my house?” she asked.

Minister alleges unpaid dues, calls out mischief

In response, Himachal minister Vikramaditya Singh accused Ranaut of making misleading statements and not paying her dues. In a Facebook post, Singh wrote, “Mohtarma badi shararat karti hai, bijli ka bill nahin bharti hai, phir manch par sarkar ko kosti hai, aisa kaisa chalega” — implying that the MP was deliberately avoiding bill payments and then publicly criticising the government.

He further said that such conduct was unbecoming of a public representative, especially while raising allegations without first settling pending dues.

Electricity board confirms non-payment and high load

According to the Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Limited (HPSEBL), Ranaut has not paid electricity bills amounting to Rs 90,384 for January and February, which also include old dues of Rs 32,287. The HPSEB clarified that the domestic connection registered in her name at her Simsa village residence in Manali has a connected load of 94.82 KW — about 1,500% higher than an average household.

Additionally, the board stated that Ranaut had defaulted on payments from October to December as well.

Hitting back at Singh’s remarks, Kangana declared during another public event in Sarkaghat, “If Vikramaditya Singh is a Raja babu, I am also a queen,” referring to her cinematic persona and his royal lineage as the son of late Chief Minister Virbhadra Singh and Congress state chief Pratibha Singh.

On Thursday, the Opposition INDIA bloc called for the immediate repeal of Section 44(3) of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDP), arguing that it undermines the foundational principles of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005.

The demand was made during a joint press conference in New Delhi, led by Congress leader Gaurav Gogoi, who announced that over 120 MPs from INDIA bloc parties, including Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi, have endorsed a memorandum to this effect. The document is set to be submitted to Information and Technology Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw.

The press conference saw participation from prominent opposition figures, including MM Abdulla (DMK), Priyanka Chaturvedi (Shiv Sena-UBT), John Brittas (CPI-M), Javed Ali Khan (Samajwadi Party), and Naval Kishor (RJD), reflecting a united front against the controversial provision.

Gogoi emphasized that civil rights activists have also raised strong objections to Section 44(3), which they claim effectively dismantles the transparency guaranteed by the RTI Act.

Under the original Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, public authorities could withhold personal information if its disclosure bore no relation to public activity or interest, or if it constituted an unwarranted invasion of privacy. However, this restriction came with a critical safeguard: the Central or State Public Information Officer, or an appellate authority, could override the exemption if disclosing the information served a greater public good.

In contrast, Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act amends this provision to allow government bodies to withhold any “information which relates to personal information” without exceptions or consideration of public interest. Critics, including the INDIA bloc, argue that this blanket restriction eliminates the balance between privacy and transparency that the RTI Act sought to maintain, effectively shielding government actions from scrutiny.

Gogoi described the amendment as a direct assault on democratic accountability, stating, “This change destroys the spirit of the RTI Act, which has been a cornerstone of citizens’ rights to information. We cannot allow such a rollback of transparency.” The opposition’s push to repeal the section underscores broader concerns about the government’s approach to data protection and its potential to erode public access to information.