Supreme Court Issues Notice on Plea to Declare Ram Setu a National Monument
Introduction
The Supreme Court of India has issued a notice to the Union Government on a plea seeking the declaration of Ram Setu (Adam’s Bridge) as a national monument. The petition was filed by BJP leader and advocate Subramanian Swamy, who argued that the structure holds immense historical, cultural, and religious significance and must be preserved under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.
What is Ram Setu?
Geographical Location: Ram Setu, also known as Adam’s Bridge, is a chain of natural limestone shoals connecting Rameswaram (India) with Mannar Island (Sri Lanka).
Cultural & Religious Importance: It is believed to be the bridge constructed by Lord Rama’s army of Vanaras to reach Lanka, as mentioned in the epic Ramayana.
Scientific & Geological Aspects: NASA satellite images have shown the structure’s unique formation, sparking debates over whether it is a natural formation or a man-made structure.
The Legal Debate
The plea seeks protection of Ram Setu as a national heritage monument.
The issue gained prominence during the Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project, which proposed cutting through Ram Setu to create a navigable channel.
Critics argue this would cause environmental degradation, while supporters of preservation emphasize its civilizational and cultural heritage value.
Government & Court Stand
Earlier, the Union Government had filed affidavits stating Ram Setu is a natural formation, not man-made.
The Supreme Court, however, has now agreed to examine the matter afresh and asked the Centre to respond.
If declared a national monument, Ram Setu would fall under the protection of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), restricting any developmental activity around it.
UPSC Relevance
Polity & Governance: Role of Supreme Court, PILs, Centre–State responsibilities.
Culture & Heritage: Importance of Ram Setu in Indian civilization.
Environment & Development: Sethusamudram project, coastal ecosystem, marine biodiversity concerns.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s notice revives the debate on development versus heritage preservation. The final decision could set a precedent for how India balances infrastructure projects with cultural and environmental conservation.