The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice to the Centre on a plea filed by former Rajya Sabha MP Dr Subramanian Swamy seeking a direction to the Union government to decide his representation to declare Ram Setu as a national monument and a monument of national importance under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958. As reported by Bar & Bench and Live Law
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta sought the Centre’s response and issued notice to the Union of India and the Archaeological Survey of India, making the notice returnable within four weeks. Senior Advocate Vibha Makhija appeared on behalf of Swamy as he had a medical issue.
Swamy’s petition states that the government is duty-bound to protect Ram Setu from any form of misuse, pollution or desecration. “This archaeological site is a matter of faith and shradha of people treating Ram Setu as a pilgrimage,” the plea said, while also highlighting that archaeological studies and scientific findings support its existence as a man-made monument of religious significance.
Ram Setu, also known as Adam’s Bridge, is a chain of limestone shoals between Pamban Island, also known as Rameswaram Island, off the south-eastern coast of Tamil Nadu, and Mannar Island, off the north-western coast of Sri Lanka. It has found mention in the Ramayana, where it is stated to have been constructed by Lord Rama with the help of local allies to reach Lanka and rescue his wife Sita from King Ravana. According to Swamy’s plea, the bridge was used for traversing on foot till around 1480 AD, after which it became unusable due to storms.
Swamy argued that under Sections 3 and 4 of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, the Government of India is duty-bound to declare ancient monuments of national importance. The petition also sought a survey by the Geological Survey of India and the Archaeological Survey of India with respect to Ram Setu.
The matter has a long history before the court. In January 2023, the Supreme Court had recorded Solicitor General Tushar Mehta’s statement that the issue was under consideration by the Ministry of Culture, and that Swamy could submit additional material or communication. Following this order, Swamy filed a representation with the Centre on January 27, 2023. He submitted another representation on May 13, 2025. However, he claimed that no response or decision was conveyed either to him or to the Court.
Another petition by Swamy, seeking an alternative route for the Sethu Samudram Ship Channel project to prevent damage to the historic Ram Setu, is also pending before the Supreme Court. The project proposed an 83-kilometre-long channel linking Mannar and the Palk Strait by extensive dredging, which was alleged to affect Ram Setu. Swamy has also said that the case has been pending for eight years, with no counter-affidavit filed by the Union government so far.
The Supreme Court has now posted the matter for hearing after four weeks.
