Congress leader Digvijay Singh on Friday met All India Congress Committee general secretary Rahul Gandhi and invited him for two functions in Uttar Pradesh.
The meeting comes in the backdrop of the senior leader's article in a newspaper criticising Home Minister P Chidambaram's approach to tackle the Naxal issue.
"The meeting pertained to Uttar Pradesh. I had gone there (to meet Gandhi) to invite him for two more public functions in the state before May 31," Singh said when asked about the purpose of the meeting. He did not speak further on it.
It is, however, understood that Singh, who was the chief minister of united Madhya Pradesh (of which Chhattisgarh was a part) also explained the Naxal situation in the country and the context of his article.
Singh has also sought time to meet party chief Sonia Gandhi soon and is expected to explain to her that his views on tackling Naxals were in accordance with the party policy.
In his meeting, Singh is likely to advocate implementing the Andhra Pradesh model in tackling the Maoists where dialogue, development of Maoist-hit areas and use of security forces were used simultaneously to control Left-wing extremism.
After Singh wrote the article flaying the home minister's approach, the AICC had disassociated itself from his views, saying he should have aired it within the party forum and not outside. Party sources said the decision of the government to convene a meeting of MPs belonging to 33 worst Naxal-affected districts on April 30 is part of the strategy which Singh favoured.
In the meeting on April 30, Home Minister P Chidambaram and top home ministry officials are expected to apprise the MPs about its strategy to deal with the Maoists and seek their cooperation in the endeavour.
Singh is expected to criticise the Bharatiya Janata Party government in Chhattisgarh for 'mishandling' the Naxal problem, as 76 security personnel were killed on April 6 in the worst strike by Maoists.
Party sources also maintained that tackling the Naxal menace was primarily the responsibility of the state government and the home minister should not have taken responsibility for the attack on the security forces.
