The Union Cabinet’s approval of a proposal to rename the state of Kerala as “Keralam” has initiated a formal constitutional procedure while simultaneously triggering political discussion and cultural debate across the country. The development gained additional public attention after senior Congress leader Shashi Tharoor responded with a humorous linguistic observation that quickly resonated online.
Soon after the Cabinet, chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, cleared the proposal, Tharoor posted on social media raising a light-hearted question about how residents of the state would be referred to in English if the name change takes effect. Noting that commonly used terms such as “Keralite” and “Keralan” are derived from the existing name, he joked that alternatives like “Keralamite” sounded like a microorganism, while “Keralamian” resembled the name of a rare mineral. He even suggested, in jest, that the Kerala Chief Minister’s Office could organise a public competition to coin an appropriate new demonym, adding humour to an otherwise serious administrative development.
The Cabinet’s approval represents a key stage in a constitutional process that began when the Kerala Legislative Assembly passed a resolution on June 24, 2024, formally requesting that the state’s name be changed to “Keralam.” The move reflects a longstanding demand to align the English name of the state with its Malayalam-language usage, where “Keralam” is already widely used.
Following the Union Cabinet’s clearance, the next procedural step involves the President of India referring the proposed Kerala Alteration of Name Bill, 2026 to the Kerala Legislative Assembly for its views, as required under the proviso to Article 3 of the Constitution. After the Assembly submits its opinion, the Union government will proceed with the legislative process. The President’s recommendation will then be sought to introduce the Bill in Parliament, where approval would be required to amend the First Schedule of the Constitution and formally implement the name change.
The Kerala government had earlier urged the Centre to carry out the necessary constitutional amendment under Article 3 to officially replace “Kerala” with “Keralam,” framing the proposal as an affirmation of linguistic authenticity and cultural identity rather than a political restructuring.
While the renaming carries legal and symbolic significance, Tharoor’s comments added a lighter dimension to the public conversation, prompting widespread online discussion about language, identity, and how English terminology adapts to regional naming traditions. The debate highlighted the cultural nuances involved when local linguistic forms intersect with global usage.
Separately, Tharoor also drew attention earlier in the week for praising the installation of a statue of C. Rajagopalachari at Rashtrapati Bhavan. He noted that Rajagopalachari had served as the first and only Indian Governor-General of India before the country became a republic, later handing over office to the nation’s first President. Tharoor described him as a political figure he had long admired, recalling his own support for Rajagopalachari’s Swatantra Party during his student years.
He characterised Rajagopalachari’s ideology as combining liberal economic principles and support for free enterprise with a commitment to social justice. Tharoor also highlighted what he described as the leader’s strong grounding in Indian civilisational values and religious faith while remaining free from communal prejudice. Concluding his remarks, he expressed regret that few contemporary political figures, in his view, reflected similar convictions.
As the constitutional process moves forward, the proposal to rename Kerala as Keralam is expected to continue generating discussion not only in legal and political circles but also in cultural and linguistic debates across India.
