Author: Legal Correspondent
Publication: The Hindu
Date: November 5, 2008
URL: http://www.hindu.com/2008/11/05/stories/2008110561341500.htm
Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy has
questioned in the Supreme Court the Centre's stand that Ramar Sethu is not
an integral part of Hindu religion.
In his fresh written submissions in the Sethusamudram
case, he said the revised stand of the Centre, in its submissions filed on
October 12, "has no basis either in fact or in law." He refuted
the averment that the "petitioners have not proved that Ramar Sethu is
an integral or essential part of the Hindu religion to attract Articles 25
and 26 of the Constitution."
Dr. Swamy said: "The Union of India has
taken contradictory and differing positions in various affidavits filed during
the course of the proceedings, attributing each position to various Hindu
texts without sourcing it to any credible religious scholar but based on dubious
unauthoritative translations."
These contradictions indicated that the government
was not in a position to answer the question whether Ramar Sethu was qualified
to be regarded as an integral part of the Hindu religion or to be designated
as an ancient monument within the meaning of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological
Sites and Remains Act. "A Hindu will consider as an integral part of
his or her religion that which would make his spiritual life incomplete if
it is not prayed at or to at least once in his or her lifetime."
On the Centre's submission that Lord Rama
himself had destroyed Sethu, Dr. Swamy said: "It is irrelevant to adduce
this argument even if this interpretation of counsel is based on one of the
sources quoted by one of the petitioners. What is necessary is that the interpretation
or inference must be based on an authorised, scholarly, unimpeachable translation
from the original Sanskrit language text."
The averment by the Sethusamudram Corporation
that it was "contemplating provision of a viewing gallery along the [shipping]
channel alignment demolishes the stand of counsel, especially the averment
that Ramar Sethu is not an integral part of Hindu religion."
Dr. Swamy said the administrative decision-making
process in choosing Alignment 6, if implemented, would be illegal and arbitrary.
Hence the decision to pursue Alignment 6, entailing a rupture in Ramar Sethu,
should be judicially invalidated. The court has already reserved verdict in
this case.
