10-foot ‘caste wall' comes down, fragile peace holds in a Tamil Nadu village

Indian Express

2 days ago

For nearly three weeks, in the heart of Muthuladampatti village in Tamil Nadu's Karur district, stood a concrete wall — 200 feet long, 10 feet high — separating two settlements that had long lived in uneasy proximity.
Those who built it, members of the Thottia Naicker community, said it was a barrier to keep out 'outsiders' who, they claimed, loitered and drank in the area. To those who lived on the other side — the Arunthathiyars, a Scheduled Caste, historically at the bottom of the social hierarchy — it was something else entirely: a 'wall of untouchability'. The structure, they said, was not about keeping out strangers. It was about keeping them out.
The dispute that followed unfolded with complaints, denials, tense public meetings, and finally, under the glare of police lights and amid heavy rain, the wall's demolition in the early hours of Sunday morning — carried out not by the government, but by members of the very community that had erected it.
Muthuladampatti lies just a kilometre from the Karur Collector's office. In terms of social geography, it is divided by more than roads. Around 200 Thottia Naicker families and roughly 45 Arunthathiyar families live in separate settlements, their histories intertwined with Tamil Nadu's complex caste order.
The Thottia Naickers, an intermediate caste with historical ties to warrior and leadership roles, predominantly inhabit western and central Tamil Nadu districts. They have been politically active in regional parties. The land where the wall was built is recognised historically as theirs for community use, including a temple and stage for events.
In contrast, the Arunthathiyars have been historically marginalised and socially disadvantaged, often facing severe caste-based discrimination and segregation. Their requests for shared public facilities on the land were repeatedly denied, fuelling tensions.
The land where the wall appeared is 1.25 acres of poramboke — public land — long under the informal possession of the Thottia Naickers. The Arunthathiyars, who have their own temple within their settlement, have for years asked for a share of the land to build a public toilet and their own stage for cultural events, particularly during the annual festival of Sri Muthumariamman temple, known for the goddess of rain and fertility.
Arunthathiyars' requests were repeatedly turned down. Recently, they allege, their attempts to build a stage and toilet on the land were physically blocked.
Then, in mid-July, the wall began to come up. According to the Arunthathiyars, the Thottia Naickers collected contributions from each household, mobilised men and women to work quickly, and finished the structure at lightning speed. A village Panchayath official told The Indian Express that they had orally instructed them to stop the wall construction following a complaint.
The Arunthathiyars called it a 'wall of untouchability'. One of the residents from the Arundhatiyar community in the area, who is associated with local community services of the government, requesting anonymity citing the truce talks, said they raised a complaint as the wall was evidently 'preventing free access to the areas where caste Hindus live'.
'It was an insult, so we raised it as a clear case of caste discrimination,' he said.
The Arundhatiyar community said they were also de facto prohibited from entering upper-caste areas wearing footwear, being shouted at if they did, and being denied use of the existing stage.
The Thottia Naickers, however, rejected these allegations during mediation talks held in the midst of the controversy. According to them, it was some outsiders who 'problematised' things to trigger caste clashes. They claimed that the wall, built on land in their possession for ages, was to essentially keep the outsiders, who allegedly created trouble under the influence of alcohol.
By early August, the wall had become a flashpoint. The Tamil Nadu Untouchability Eradication Front condemned it, calling for its removal. Road blockades by Arunthathiyars followed. Two peace meetings — one chaired by the Tahsildar on July 13 and another by the Revenue Divisional Officer on July 29 — failed to resolve the impasse.
Impasse, then a breakthrough
On August 7, RDO M Mohammed Byzal served an eviction notice to the Thottia Naicker community, citing violations — the land was government property and no construction permit had been obtained. The wall, he said, had been built despite warnings at the July 29 meeting.
The notice gave 15 days for removal, but with tensions high and the potential for clashes real, a second, more urgent notice arrived late on August 8 — remove the wall by 11 am the next day, or officials would do it themselves.
That night, members of the Thottia Naicker community staged a sit-in protest at the Collector's office. They returned home only after being told the demolition would go ahead regardless.
On the morning of August 9, around 200 police officers, led by Superintendent of Police K Josh Thangaiah, took up position near the wall. Caste Hindu women formed a human barrier, standing in front of it.
The SP convened a peace meeting at the Tahsildar's office, bringing leaders from both groups to the same table. Revenue officials, including the RDO and Tahsildar, joined in. After hours of talks — described later as 'direct and indirect' — the Thottia Naicker representatives agreed to dismantle the wall themselves.
By 3.30 pm, the work began. By 9.30 pm, the wall was down; by 2.30 am, after heavy rain, the foundation was gone. Police and plainclothes officers kept watch throughout.
The SP urged members of both communities not to inflame tensions, and advised those who had pressed for the demolition not to celebrate.
On Sunday, an uneasy calm hung over Muthuladampatti, according to the office of the SP.
'Police pickets were posted at multiple points. Officials promised round-the-clock security,' said a senior officer requesting anonymity. 'It is very sensitive. It can be about winning and defeating each other. In changing times, even officers' religion and caste would also be used to trigger tension,' he said.
In several rural pockets in Tamil Nadu, such walls are not mere concrete structures, but symbols, contested and potent, in the long battle over caste and access. 'The removal of the wall happening without violence is not a rare phenomenon; local administrations have facilitated similar mediations in the past in many places,' the officer said.
Asked about the entrenched segregation, disputes over shared spaces, and the weight of historical discrimination, he said they all remain standing, 'even if the wall does not'.
'We can convince and remove physical walls, but those in the mind can be removed only through political work. Politicians should do that,' he said.
Similar incidents
The Uthapuram caste wall near Madurai, a 12-foot-high, 600-metre-long wall erected by dominant castes, had faced intense protests from 2007 onward. A partial demolition occurred in 2008 to allow Dalits access, though caste violence continued for years afterwards.
In Thokammur village, Tiruvallur district, an eight-month campaign led to the demolition in 2022 of a wall built in 2016 by the numerically dominant Reddiyar caste to restrict Adi Dravidar Dalits from accessing temple land and community space.
In Virudhunagar district, a 150-metre-long wall built on government land to hide a Dalit cremation ground behind caste Hindu properties was demolished in 2024 after sustained protests by Dalit organisations.
In Coimbatore district, a 20-foot-long wall constructed in 1989 to block Dalits' access to the main road was finally demolished in 2010 following advocacy by the Tamil Nadu Untouchability Eradication Front.
A 20-foot-high wall in Mathoor village, Kallakkurichi district, which prevented Dalits' access to schools and healthcare, was ordered removed by the revenue divisional officer after mass protests in 2023.
A recent instance in Trichy district includes a nine-foot wall separating Dalit colonies from farms that triggered protests in 2021.