Chandrababu Naidu has sent a clear message to TDP rebels: withdraw your nominations or face suspension. But within the ruling alliance, another problem is growing. Janasena leaders are openly warning TDP over seat sharing, demanding a 30% share in local elections and threatening to work against the party if their demand is rejected. The biggest question is why Pawan Kalyan has not publicly stepped in to resolve the dispute while leaders from his own party are issuing ultimatums to their alliance.
Bolisetty’s Three-Hour Ultimatum:
Janasena leader Bolisetty Satyanarayana has escalated the dispute by demanding that the TDP allocate 30% of seats to Janasena in every constituency. In a statement reported on October 21st, he gave the TDP three hours to respond and warned that Janasena would consider breaking the alliance arrangement and working against the TDP if its demand was not met. He also alleged that some local TDP leaders were unwilling to give Janasena even 10% of the seats. Bolisetty further claimed that Janasena workers were being denied opportunities despite their work for the alliance. He cited the situation in Visakhapatnam East as an example and called on Pawan Kalyan and party political affairs committee chairman Nadendla Manohar to intervene.
Chandrababu’s Warning Makes the Situation More Complicated:
Naidu, meanwhile, has directed TDP leaders to ensure that rebel candidates withdraw their nominations. He has warned that those who defy the party’s decision will face suspension. He has also asked leaders to respect the alliance arrangement with Janasena and the BJP, while assuring disappointed aspirants that they may be considered for nominated posts.
Why Is Pawan Kalyan Silent?
Pawan’s silence is now a political question in itself. One possibility is that he wants the dispute handled through internal discussions rather than public confrontation. Another is that he is allowing the negotiations to continue without committing himself to a fixed percentage that could limit his options across constituencies. There is also a practical problem. Pawan must balance the demands of Janasena workers with the realities of governing alongside the TDP and BJP. A public confrontation with Naidu could complicate that relationship. But allowing local leaders to issue increasingly sharp warnings without a clear response could leave Janasena workers wondering whether their concerns are reaching the party leadership.
The Alliance Had Already Agreed on a Different Approach:
The current dispute is particularly striking because the parties had publicly indicated that they would decide local candidates according to local political strength rather than a rigid numerical formula. On October 14th, Janasena MLA Bolisetty Srinivas said discussions with Naidu had been successful and that the parties had agreed to protect each other’s interests. The leaders also indicated that the alliance would avoid friendly contests.
That understanding appears to be under pressure now. Bolisetty Satyanarayana’s demand for 30% in every constituency is a different proposition from allocating seats based on local strength. It raises a basic question: was the earlier agreement sufficiently clear, or did both parties leave too much room for different interpretations?
The disagreement also shows why statewide percentages can become difficult to apply. Janasena may have a stronger presence in some municipalities and wards, while TDP may have a stronger organisation elsewhere. A workable formula must account for those differences without leaving either party’s cadre feeling ignored.
What Should Naidu and Pawan Do Now?
The immediate priority is to bring the dispute back to the negotiating table. Naidu and Pawan need a clear agreement on seat allocation, a mechanism for resolving constituency-level disagreements and a firm deadline for announcing the final candidates.
They must also communicate the agreement to their local leaders. Otherwise, even if the top leadership reaches a compromise, resentment could continue on the ground. Janasena should clarify whether the 30% demand is an official position authorised by Pawan or a demand being advanced by individual leaders. The TDP, in turn, needs to explain how it is balancing alliance commitments with local assessments of candidates.
The stakes are not limited to this round of local elections. Both parties entered the alliance with the understanding that cooperation would help them govern and contest elections together. Repeated public threats could undermine that understanding, even if the alliance ultimately remains intact. The real question is not whether Pawan Kalyan will speak today or tomorrow. It is whether he and Chandrababu Naidu can turn an increasingly public dispute into a clear agreement before it damages coordination at the grassroots.
