Watch: Tamil Nadu’s stone transport ban: What’s happening? | Focus Tamil Nadu

Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, C Joseph Vijay, firmly reaffirmed his position on the Cauvery issue and the Mekedatu dam construction halt during the state assembly session on Friday. He emphasized that there would be no compromise on either matter and that his ruling party, Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK), had no intention of exploiting the issue for political gain.

Vijay highlighted that the Cauvery River is crucial for Tamil Nadu and carries deep emotional significance for the state. He recounted that the Tamil Nadu assembly unanimously passed a resolution in June, sending it to Prime Minister Narendra Modi. In response to the Union Minister of State for Jal Shakti's lack of detail on the dam issue, the Tamil Nadu government immediately wrote another letter to the Prime Minister, emphasizing that no legal or administrative approval should be granted for the dam's construction at the Mekedatu site, citing the Cauvery Tribunal's final verdict and the Supreme Court's final verdict.

Vijay was resolute in his stance, asserting that his government would not yield even a fraction of Tamil Nadu's rights in the Cauvery water-sharing dispute or regarding the Mekedatu dam construction. He traced the history of the issue, stating that his government has handled it legally since 1969, maintaining the same approach.

Opposition leader from the DMK, Udhayanidhi Stalin, targeted Vijay on the Cauvery issue during a special calling attention motion, prompting Vijay to recount how Tamil Nadu had managed the issue throughout the years, from exploring dialogue to adopting a legal approach.

Stalin criticized Vijay for his reluctance to convene an all-party meeting in Karnataka, noting that the state's political parties are united on the issue and have demonstrated unity by holding an all-party meeting and considering stakeholders' representation. He also contrasted the Kuruvai cultivation relief package provided by Vijay's government, amounting to ₹134 crore, with the drought relief funds that farmers are now seeking, emphasizing the distinction between the two.