New Delhi, Apr 6 (PTI) Senior Congress leader P Chidambaram on Sunday hit out at Prime Minister Narendra Modi over his remark that the Centre allocated for Tamil Nadu's development three-time higher funds compared to the period before 2014.

The former Union finance minister said even a first-year economics student would be able to tell that the "economic metric" would always be higher when compared to previous years.

"Hon'ble prime minister and central ministers constantly say that they have given more money to Tamil Nadu in 2014-24 than was given in 2004-14. For example, Hon'ble prime minister said that his government has given for railway projects in Tamil Nadu seven times more money than before," Chidambaram said in a post on X.

"Ask a first-year student of economics. She will tell you that the 'economic metric' will always be higher than in the previous years. The GDP's size is bigger now than before. The size of the central budget is bigger every year than in the previous year. Government's total expenditure is bigger every year than in the previous year," he added.

"You are one year older than in the previous year. In terms of 'numbers', the number will be bigger but is it higher in terms of proportion of GDP or in terms of proportion of total expenditure?" the former Union finance minister asked.

Against the backdrop of the ruling DMK crying foul over the allocation of funds, Modi -- during his visit to the state on Sunday -- said the central government allocated three times more money for Tamil Nadu's development over the past decade compared to the period before 2014.

He noted that this increased funding had greatly contributed to Tamil Nadu's economic and industrial growth.

Despite the increased allocation, some "cry" over funds, the prime minister said, referring to beneficiaries from the state in respect of several initiatives. PTI ASK ASK SZM SZM

Allocation of central funds questioned as absolute increases may not reflect proportional share of state budget or GDP. The article contrasts an assertion that the Centre allocated three times more funding for the state in the later decade with a critique that nominal increases reflect general economic growth and larger budgets; it argues assessments should focus on the proportional share relative to GDP or total central expenditure rather than raw totals.