NEW DELHI — The Centre’s decision to confer Padma Bhushan, the third-highest civilian award in the country, on Vellappally Natesan, general secretary of the Sree Narayana Dharma Paripalana (SNDP) Yogam and a Ezhava leader in Kerala, has raised a question whether repeated Islamophobic remarks can be reconciled with a national honour meant to recognise distinguished public service.
Natesan was selected for the award under the category of Public Affairs, as per the Ministry of Home Affairs. The announcement, however, comes amid sustained backlash in Kerala over a series of statements attributed to him which are openly hostile towards the Muslim community. Civil society groups, political parties and minority organisations argue that such rhetoric risks deepening communal fault lines in a state historically known for relative social harmony.
However, the timing of the award sends a troubling message. “When a public figure repeatedly targets a religious community, legitimising that individual with one of the country’s highest civilian honours raises serious questions,” said a senior social activist in Thiruvananthapuram. “Is polarisation now being rebranded as public service?”
At the heart of the controversy lies a broader debate over what constitutes “public affairs.” While supporters of Natesan point to his long association with social organisations and his influence within the Ezhava community, opponents argue that influence cannot be divorced from responsibility. They contend that hate speech — particularly from a mass leader — has tangible consequences, including normalising prejudice and undermining constitutional values of equality and fraternity.
Legal experts note that while the Padma awards are discretionary and not subject to judicial review in most cases, they carry moral and symbolic weight. “Civilian honours are not just about individual achievement; they reflect the values the state chooses to celebrate,” said a constitutional commentator. “When those honoured are accused of spreading communal animosity, the credibility of the honours themselves comes under strain.”
The controversy has also reignited calls for clearer guidelines and greater transparency in the selection process for national awards, including a more rigorous assessment of a nominee’s public conduct and statements.
As the debate intensifies, the Padma Bhushan for Natesan has become more than a personal accolade. For many, it now stands as a test of whether India’s highest civilian honours will remain aligned with the constitutional promise of social harmony — or whether political convenience and majoritarian narratives are quietly reshaping the definition of merit in public life.
