New Delhi: In a development that has rekindled decades-old debates around faith, heritage, and history, the Supreme Court on Friday issued a notice to the Centre over its delay in deciding whether the iconic Ram Setu — the chain of limestone shoals connecting India and Sri Lanka — should be declared a national monument.
The notice came in response to a petition by senior leader and former Rajya Sabha MP Dr. Subramanian Swamy, who has been fighting this legal battle for nearly two decades. A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta admitted the petition and directed the Centre to file its response within four weeks.
This latest petition cites the Supreme Court’s own order from January 19, 2023, in which the court had asked the Centre to take a call on Swamy’s representation. The Centre, at that time, had assured the bench that it was “actively considering” the proposal to declare Ram Setu a national heritage monument. The court had also granted Swamy liberty to approach it again if the government failed to act in a reasonable time frame.
Swamy, in his new plea, highlighted that he had submitted all necessary documents to the Ministry of Culture on January 27, 2023, followed by another representation on May 13, 2025. Yet, despite repeated follow-ups, neither he nor the Supreme Court received any concrete response from the government.
“Ram Setu Is a Symbol of Faith”
In his petition, Dr. Swamy described Ram Setu not just as an archaeological treasure but as a “symbol of faith and devotion” for millions across the globe. He emphasized that the bridge carries immense cultural and religious significance, with references in the Ramayana describing how Lord Ram’s army of vanaras built the bridge to reach Lanka and rescue Sita from Ravana.
Swamy also cited scientific and archaeological studies suggesting that the bridge-like formation could be man-made. “This structure is both a pilgrimage site and a heritage of humanity,” the petition asserted, demanding early action from the Ministry of Culture in accordance with the Supreme Court’s directions.
A Battle that Dates Back to 2007
The controversy surrounding Ram Setu first hit national headlines in 2007, when the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government proposed the ambitious Sethusamudram Ship Channel Project. The project aimed to create a navigable shipping route between the Gulf of Mannar and the Palk Strait by dredging through Ram Setu.
Proponents argued that this would drastically cut shipping time between India’s eastern and western coasts. However, environmentalists, religious groups, and cultural activists opposed it, citing potential ecological damage and the bridge’s spiritual significance.
Swamy filed his first petition that year, demanding both the cancellation of the project and the protection of Ram Setu by declaring it a national heritage monument. While the project was eventually shelved amid protests and environmental concerns, the demand for heritage status has lingered on for nearly two decades.
What Is Ram Setu?
Ram Setu, also known globally as Adam’s Bridge, is a chain of limestone shoals stretching around 48 kilometers between Rameswaram in Tamil Nadu and Mannar Island in Sri Lanka.
Historical records suggest that until the 15th century, the area was so shallow that one could actually walk across portions of the bridge. However, storms and rising sea levels submerged most parts over time, leaving behind the chain of sandbanks visible today.
In 1993, NASA released satellite images clearly showing the structure’s unique formation. While some scientists argue it is a natural geological formation, others believe it to be a man-made or man-modified bridge, keeping the mystery alive.
Faith Across Religions
Interestingly, Ram Setu carries significance beyond Hinduism. In Islamic tradition, it is believed that after being expelled from heaven, Prophet Adam set foot on Adam’s Peak in Sri Lanka and crossed into India using this very bridge.
Christians, sharing the same Abrahamic tradition, also associate Adam’s Bridge with this legend. The name Adam’s Bridge itself dates back to the British era, when officials of the East India Company recorded the formation under this title.
What Lies Ahead?
The Supreme Court’s fresh notice has now put the Centre under pressure to clarify its stand. Swamy argues that the government has a constitutional duty to protect Ram Setu from “misuse, pollution, or desecration” and to preserve it for future generations. For Dr. Subramanian Swamy, this is not just a legal battle but a mission to protect what he calls “India’s sacred legacy.”
Heritage activists point out that while India has declared numerous sites as monuments of national importance under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958, Ram Setu continues to languish without official recognition despite its global fame.
With the Supreme Court granting the Centre four weeks to respond, all eyes are now on the Ministry of Culture and the Union Government. Will they finally grant heritage status to Ram Setu, or will the matter continue to drift like it has for years?
