The Supreme Court of India.
Credit: PTI File Photo
The Supreme Court on Friday asked the Centre to file a response to a plea by former Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy seeking a direction to “expeditiously” decide his representation to declare ‘Ram Setu’ as a national monument.
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta issued notice to the Centre and agreed to examine Swamy’s plea. The matter will be heard again after four weeks.
‘Ram Setu’, also known as Adam's Bridge, is a chain of limestone shoals between Pamban Island off Tamil Nadu’s southeastern coast and Mannar Island off northwestern Sri Lanka.
The plea referred to a 2023 Supreme Court order. On Swamy’s earlier plea on January 19, 2023, the Centre had said it was considering the proposal to declare ‘Ram Setu’ a national heritage monument.
Swamy’s fresh petition said the structure fulfils the criteria of an ancient monument under Sections 3 and 4 of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958, making it the government’s duty to declare it of national importance. It also cited Section 16 of the Act, which requires protection of such sites from misuse, pollution or desecration.
The plea said Ram Setu is also a matter of faith, treated as a pilgrimage site, and that archaeological and scientific studies support its existence as a man-made monument. It sought directions to the Ministry of Culture to decide on Swamy’s representation in a time-bound manner in compliance with the 2023 order.
It further asked the court to exercise its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to grant relief in public interest.
The petition stated that millions of citizens visit Rameswaram annually and that pilgrimages to Kashi are considered incomplete without visiting Rameswaram. It said the Ramayana and related historic sites are part of Indian culture and heritage.
In its January 19, 2023 order, the Supreme Court had recorded the Solicitor General’s statement that the matter was under consideration by the Ministry of Culture, and that Swamy could submit additional material within two weeks. The court had then asked the Centre to take a decision and allowed Swamy to return if dissatisfied. Swamy’s latest plea said no response or decision has been communicated either to him or to the court.