Ram Setu Case: SC Seeks Centre’s Response on Subramanian Swamy’s Plea for Monument Status
The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice on a plea filed by BJP leader and former Rajya Sabha MP Dr. Subramanian Swamy seeking directions to the Union Ministry of Culture to expeditiously decide his representations urging the declaration of the Ram Setu (Adam’s Bridge) as a monument of national importance.
The matter was heard by a Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta.
Senior Advocate Vibha Datta Makhija appearing for Dr. Swamy informed the Court that while Swamy usually appears in person, he could not do so as he has recently undergone a triple bypass surgery.
“He has requested me to apprise Your Lordships of the situation in this Ram Setu matter,” the counsel said.
Taking note of the submissions, the Court issued notice, making it returnable in four weeks.
The petition follows a previous order dated January 19, 2023, passed by a Bench of the Supreme Court in I.A. No. 88228/2019 in Transferred Case (Civil) No. 27 of 2007, wherein the Court had recorded the Solicitor General’s assurance that the matter was under consideration by the Ministry.
The Court had also granted liberty to Dr. Swamy to submit additional material and had observed that the Court be apprised of the decision taken by the Government.
However, Dr. Swamy now contends that no response or update has been furnished either to him or the Court since then, prompting the present Public Interest Litigation.
"It is also important to note that this archeological site is a matter of faith and shradha of people treating Ram-Setu as a pilgrimage and all these archaeological studies and scientific findings are foundational evidence supplementing the existence of the man-made monument as a pilgrimage for worshipers," the plea states.
The petition filed through Advocate Satya Sabharwal recalls that the matter originated in 2007 when Writ Petitions No. 18223-24 of 2007 filed before the Madras High Court were transferred to the Supreme Court and numbered as T.C. (C) Nos. 26-27 of 2007.
At that time, the Petitioner had sought a mandamus to restrain the destruction or demolition of Ram Setu for the Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project.
The Court had passed interim orders in August and September 2007, directing that no damage be caused to Ram Setu during dredging operations.
A counter affidavit filed by the Union in 2007 was later withdrawn, and no fresh affidavit has been filed since then, Dr. Swamy submits.
In the 2019 interlocutory application, Dr. Swamy had sought directions to declare Ram Setu a national monument under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958, and to conduct a detailed survey through the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and Geological Survey of India (GSI).
He also invokes Section 16 of the Act, arguing that the Centre is duty-bound to protect the site from pollution, desecration or misuse, especially as it holds immense religious and cultural significance for Hindus, who regard it as a pilgrimage site linked to Lord Ram.
Despite his representations dated January 27, 2023, and May 13, 2025, Dr. Swamy asserts that the Government has not communicated any decision, thus warranting judicial intervention to enforce the Supreme Court’s 2023 directive.
The Writ Petition prays for directions to the Ministry of Culture to take a decision on the representations within a fixed timeline.
Case Title: Dr. Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India & Others
Hearing Date: August 29, 2025
Bench: Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta