Reminding the UPA government of an earlier Madras High Court directive, the Supreme Court on Thursday sought to know if an archaeological study could be carried out to ascertain whether Ram Sethu could be declared as an “ancient monument” under the definition of the existing Act.

The Bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan also asked senior advocate F S Nariman, defending the Centre as a special advocate, to explore whether any alternate alignment could be considered for the project.

“There is a specific direction of the Madras High Court that the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) should carry out investigations on whether Ram Sethu is an ancient monument or not,” said the Bench also comprising Justices R V Raveednran and J M Panchal.

The Bench said that Janata Party president Subramanium Swamy and senior advocate C S Vaidyanathan, while opposing the demolition of Ram Sethu, have put forward “serious” arguments for conducting an ASI probe and for carrying out the project through other alignments. They are among the batch of petitioners opposing any damage to the Ram Sethu, while proceeding with the Rs 2,427-crore Sethusamudram project.

The petitioners have contended that there was a possibility of going ahead with the project through alternative alignments which will be more economically viable and cause no damage to the environment as well, besides protecting the religious faith of Hindus who consider the structure sacred.

Suggesting a way out for the UPA government, the Bench said: “You also explore the possibility of carrying out the project through any other channels (alignments).”

... contd.