Tamil Nadu assembly Speaker M Appavu on Monday read out the Tamil version of the speech prepared for governor RN Ravi’s customary address on day one of the budget session of the House after the latter said he disagreed with it on factual and moral grounds, triggering a commotion.

Ravi, who skipped parts of his speech and walked out last year, quoted Tamil philosopher Thirvalluvar and complained his repeated request to “show due respect to the national anthem” by playing play it at the beginning and end of the address was ignored. The session began with the state’s anthem.

A resolution was passed to record the speech while Ravi, who has been at loggerheads with the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK)-led state government that has accused him of being an agent of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its ideological fount Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, was walking out.

Ravi began walking away even as Appavu said the national anthem would be played. Minister Durai Murugan read the resolution taking on record the English and Tamil versions of the customary speech.

Ravi earlier said lending his voice to the speech would constitute a constitutional travesty. “Hence, with respect to the House, I conclude my address. I wish this House a productive and healthy discussion for the good of the people.”

Appavu, who maintained the speech was sent to the governor’s office for approval, insisted the issue of the national anthem was resolved given the practice in Tamil Nadu is to play the state anthem at the beginning of a programme and the national anthem at the end. He added they may have ideological differences but the Tamil Nadu government has treated the governor’s office with respect and there would be no change in it.

Appavu said it was Ravi’s turn to be honest. He said Tamil Nadu sought central aid post-Cyclone Michaung in Chennai and floods in southern regions of the state in December but “not a paisa” came from the BJP-led Union government.

“Several lakhs in the PM Cares Fund are unaccounted for. I could ask you [Ravi] that if you asked for ₹50,000 crore from that, it would have been good [for the state].”