Rama Setu: writ petitions

Should T R Baalu out-Taliban the Afghan Talibans? V SUNDARAM        On 15 May 2007, the Madras High Court two-Judge bench consisting of Justice Jayapal and Justice Sivakumar admitted one writ petition filed by Hindu Munnani leader Ram Gopalan and two writ petitions filed by former Union Law Minister and Janata Party president Dr Subramanian Swamy relating to the current controversial issue of Rama Sethu Bridge.         The Hindu Munnani’s founder-President Rama Gopalan in his petition made a prayer to the Madras High Court to direct the Government of India to forbear from ‘demolishing the Ramar Palam’ for the Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project (SSCP). In his petition, Rama Gopalan, made it clear that he was not against the SSCP project. He emphatically asserted: ‘My only concern is that under the guise of the project, the Ramar Palam, which is otherwise known as Adams Bridge, should not, in any way, be damaged or tampered with or demolished.’         Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy in his public interest litigation petition requested the Madras High Court to restrain the Centre from in any manner causing damage to the ‘Rama Sethu’ while implementing the Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project (SSCP). In another petition, he prayed for a direction to the Centre to investigate the origin and history of Rama Sethu /
Adam’s Bridge and consequently declare it as a monument of national importance.
        Dr Subramanian Swamy, relying on references in the Valmiki Ramayana and a NASA study, contended that it had been established that the bridge was not a natural formation but was a ‘deliberately constructed bridge by placing shoal stones in a bridge formation.’ He denied that ‘Rama Sethu’ was either imaginary or mythical, and said the Government of India and the Archaeological Survey of India had not undertaken any official study about the bridge and its origin.         Dr Subramanian Swamy contended that the Centre and its agencies were bound by ARTICLE 49 of the Constitution as well as the provisions of the
Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act 1958 to protect
Adam’s Bridge known as ‘Rama Sethu’, from planned destruction by Union Shipping Minister T R Baalu. Dr Swamy also added that
the decision to proceed with the project by demolishing the

Bridge is violative of the provisions of the Constitution and the statute.’ Maintaining that it was not his intention to stop the project, Dr Swamy said it should be carried out without affecting the existing ‘Rama Sethu.’ He wanted the court to restrain the authorities from demolishing or damaging the

Bridge pending disposal of his writ petition.         I understand from some of my Advocate friends who were present in court that Dr Subramanian Swamy presented his arguments before the Madras High Court in a brilliant manner yesterday (15 May, 2007) through his inimitable means of producing conviction in a Court of Law, I mean through his plainness, conciseness and accuracy. He had charm. He had charisma. He was in full control. In isolating the important point that mattered, he ignored the many that did not. His words and phrases during the course of his arguments were both memorable and accessible. An instinctive grasp of language was married to an actor’s timing. Those who were present in court could see that Dr Swamy was persuasive because of his rejection of all superfluous and irrelevant matter and because it was known that he disdained all the mere devices of speech. In presenting his case on the imperative national need to protect the

Bridge, the most vital quality of Dr Swamy’s able advocacy lay in his sensitivity to relevancethe instinctive capacity to identify what was central to his case, to focus on it and in consequence to discard what was peripheral. Finally he showed that what mattered was the power of analysis; the ability to master and present a complex web of fact and law with clarity and maximum persuasion. Dr Swamy thus proved that advocacy is not end in itself; its end is the action of others.         It is understood that during the course of arguments, the Madras High Court indicated that it may be necessary to appoint an Advocate -Commission to ascertain the facts related to the existence of Ramar Palam (Rama Sethu). When Dr Swamy pointed out that there is an imminent danger to cause damage to the Rama Setu Bridge, through a lightning process of sudden rock blasting (perhaps with anti-Hindu T R Baalu even resorting to the use of RDX the suggestive words within brackets here mine!!!), the court observed that within two weeks, the Government is not expected to damage the Rama Sethu Bridge, and directed the issuance of notices to Government of India and posted the case for hearing on 29 May, 2007.         As a true Hindu, Dr Subramanian Swamy is fully aware of the fact that a non-Hindu like Mrs Ambika Soni, and dangerous Anti-Hindus like T R Baalu and his ‘Political Landlord’ Karunanidhi are to Rama Setu what Taliban is to Bamiyan. I am not writing any Indo-Islamic fiction! In March 2001, the Ministry of Culture in Afghanistan’s Islamist Taliban Government was leading a holy jehad to destroy the ancient gigantic Buddha relics of Bamiyan in
Afghanistan. On 4 March, 2001, Maulawi Qudratullah Jamal
Mrs Ambika Soni’s Ministerial counterpart in the Taliban Government at that time officially announced on their Radio Shariyat, the details of a decision taken by 400 religious clerics from across Afghanistan who had declared that the Bamiyan Buddha statues were against the tenets of Islam. Maulawi Qudratullah Jamal, very much like Mrs Ambika Soni and T R Baalu in regard to their committed destruction of the

Bridge in Rameshwaram, said with arrogant Islamic authority ‘The Muslim Clerics have come out with a consensus that the statues are un-Islamic’.         Let me now turn to anti-Hindu Maulawi Qudratullah Jamal of Tamilnadu and
India, I mean T R Baalu. On 16 April, 2007, Union Shipping Minister Mr T R Baalu said that his Ministry had concluded that there is no scientific proof behind the existence of Rama Sethu. He told newspersons that, ‘the studies have not revealed the existence of a man-made structure in the area’. He implied that all the government was after destroying were merely some rocks, and that the Hindus’ beliefs about Setu which make it an object of worship for them, were hollow and superstitious. Six years earlier, a Taliban Leader in
Afghanistan called Mr Mullah Omar and his other Taliban colleagues did not even have any compulsions like what Mr Baalu is having today, of having to claim science for their justification. Mr Mullah Omar, casually shrugging his shoulders like T R Baalu, gave his death sentence with a wicked smile to the ancient gigantic Buddha relics of Bamiyan in
Afghanistan in these words:
All we are breaking are stones. These infidel statues are insulting to Islam and should be destroyed so that they could never be worshipped again by the infidels. These shrines of infidels should be destroyed forthwith and torn down.         Later in 2001, Taliban Foreign Minister Mr Wakil Ahmad Mutawakil indicated that there was no change in the decision to destroy the statues. He was speaking after talks with a UNITED NATIONS SPECIAL ENVOY, Pierre LaFrance, in
Kandahar who had pleaded for the continued existence of the exquisitely carved, beautiful and gigantic Buddhist statues of Bamiyan. Thus those Buddhist statues were destroyed by the Taliban Government for ever and ever. The Trio of anti-Hindu Talibans like Mrs Ambika Soni, T R Baalu and Karunanidhi is desperately trying to destroy the
Bridge to out-Taliban the Talibans of Afghanistan in
India today. Of course, unfortunately for Rama Setu, there is no Pierre LaFrance from UN, because unlike Bamiyan Buddha relics, which were UNESCO heritage sites, Rama Setu enjoys no such status- apart from being the holiest of holy pilgrim places in the hearts of the Hindus.
        After giving his brilliant arguments in the Madras High Court yesterday Dr Subramanian Swamy sent the following letter to T R Baalu, Union Minister for Shipping, which speaks for itself, proclaiming the timeless Hindu message of righteousness and not self-righteousness:         Dear Mr Baalu:         This is to inform you that the Vacation Bench of the Madras High Court admitted my Writ Petition No 18223 & 18224 of 2007 today, and the Union Assistant Solicitor General of
India, Mr Wilson who was present took Notice in the Court itself. The next date fixed is 29 May, 2007.
        I am apprising you that during the course of my arguments for admission I had also argued for a stay order against the SSCP’s attempted demolition of the Rama Setu.         The Court observed that at the slow pace of work going on, it is not possible for the project authority to demolish the Setu, and hence I need not be concerned.         I THEREFORE EXPRESSED TO THE BENCH THE VIEW THAT THIS OBSERVATION OF THE COURT IS A DE-FACTO INJUNCTION AGAINST ATTEMPTS BY YOUR GOVERNMENT TO DEMOLISH THE RAMA SETU TILL THE NEXT HEARING. THIS VIEW OF MINE WAS NOT CONTESTED OR OPPOSED BY THE


.         Hence, I urge you to direct the SSCP authority to ensure that no dredging or demolition equipment nears the Rama Setu. If that happens then it would be tantamount to Contempt of Court and a breach of agreement in Court.         Best regards,         Yours sincerely,         (SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY)         Taking note of the above letter of Dr Swamy to T R Balu, I am persuaded to believe that an informal and clear indication has been given by the Madras High Court to the effect that no unilateral action should be taken either by T R Balu or by the Government of India in regard to the already planned wholesale destruction of the Rama Setu Bridge. All the peace loving and helpless Hindus of India are very happy that Dr Subramanian Swamy has so adroitly tried to check mate the Guerilla moves of the treacherous ‘Talibanistic’ Anti-Hindu Trio of Mrs Ambika Soni, T R Balu and M.Karunanidhi to blast the Rama Setu Bridge, very much like the American bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II in 1945, regardless of the disastrous religious and cultural consequences for millions and millions of Hindus in India and the World.  http://newstodaynet.com/2007sud/may07/160507.htm 01.£õ.á., ÷£õmh vmh® “EÀhõ’ ÁõÚx :÷»õU\£õÂÀ CßÖ PÁÚDº¨¦ wº©õÚ®

¦xiÀ¼: ÷\x\•zvµ vmh® SÔzx ÷»õU\£õÂÀ AÝ©vUP¨£mi¸¢u PÁÚ Dº¨¦ wº©õÚ® ÷|ØÖ ÂÁõuzvØS ÁµÂÀø».   

C¢u PÁÚDº¨¦ wº©õÚ® CßÖ |øhö£Ó Áõ´¨¦sk GßÖ Gvº£õºUP¨£k® {ø»°À, PÁÚ Dº¨¦ wº©õÚzvß «x ÷£_ÁuØS uªÇPzøua ÷\º¢u |õßS G®.¤.,UPÐUS Áõ´¨¦ QøhzxÒÍx. ÷\x\•zvµ vmhzøu {øÓ÷ÁØÓ £õ.á., EÒÎmh C¢x Aø©¨¦PÒ Gvºzx Á¸QßÓÚ. C¢u vmhzøu A©À£kzxÁuß ‰»® Ph¾USÒ C¸US® µõ©º £õ»® ]øuUP¨£kQÓx GßÖ TÔ Gvº¨¦ SµÀPÒ QÍ®¤²ÒÍÚ. C¨¤µaøÚø¯ Ph¢u J¸ ©õu©õP £õº¼ö©smiÀ £õ.á., £»•øÓ Qͨ¤ Á¸QÓx. CuØS v.•.P., EÒÎmh uªÇP G®.¤.,UPÒ Gvº¨¦ öu›Âzx Á¸QßÓÚº. ÷\x\•zvµ® vmh® öuõhº£õÚ C¢u ¤µaøÚ¯õÀ £»•øÓ AøÁ°À A©Î²® Ta\À SǨ£•® HØ£mk AøÁ JzvøÁUP¨£mk Á¢ux. C¨¤µaøÚøø¯ öuõhº¢x Âhõ©À ¤izx Á¸® £õ.á., ÷»õU\£õÂÀ PÁÚ Dº¨¦ wº©õÚzvØS ÷|õmjì AÎzux. £õ.á., G®.¤.,¯õÚ ©À÷Põzµõ uµ¨¤À Á¼²Özu¨£mh C¢u ¤µaøÚ SÔzx PÁÚ Dº¨¦ wº©õÚ® öPõskÁµ AÝ©v AÎUP¨£kö©Ú \£õ|õ¯Pº ÷\õ®|õz \mhºâ ÷|ØÖ •ßvÚ® öu›Âzx C¸¢uõº. ÷|ØÖ C¨¤µaøÚ AøÁUS Á¸® GßÖ AøÚÁµõ¾® Gvº£õºUP¨£mhx. BÚõÀ Sáµõz ÷£õ¼ GßPÄsmhº ÷£õßÓ ¤µaøÚPÍõÀ ÷\x\•zvµ ¤µaøÚ ÂÁõuzvØS Áµõ©À ÷£õÚx.C¸¢u÷£õv¾® CßÖ AøÁ°À PÁÚ Dº¨¦ wº©õÚ® «uõÚ ÂÁõu® |øhö£Ó Áõ´¨¦ÒÍuõP Gvº£õºUP¨£kQÓx. PÁÚ Dº¨¦ wº©õÚ® «x ÷£\ AÝ©vUS®£i £À÷ÁÖ G®.¤.,UPЮ ÷|õmjì AΨ£õºPÒ. wº©õÚzøu Bu›zx ÷£_ÁuØS® Gvºzx ÷£_ÁuØS® GÚ Cµsk uµ¨¦÷© ÷|õmjì AÎzu ÷£õv¾®, CÁºPøÍ S¾UPÀ •øÓ°À ÷»õU\£õ ö\¯»P® ÷uº¢öuk¨£x ÁÇUP®. J¸ PÁÚ Dº¨¦ wº©õÚ® öPõsk Á¢uõÀ Auß «x ÷£\ £»¸® ¸®¤Úõ¾® Th S¾UPÀ •øÓ°À ÷uº¢uöukUP¨£k® I¢x ÷£¸US ©mk÷© AÝ©v ÁÇ[P¨£k®. A¢u ÁøP°À ÷\x\•zvµ vmh® öuõhº£õÚ \ºaø\ SÔzu C¢u PÁÚ Dº¨¦ wº©õÚ® «x ÷£\ Cµsk uµ¨¤¾® ÷\ºzx ö©õzu® HÓzuõÇ 15 US® AvP©õÚ G®.¤.,UPÒ Âsn¨¤zv¸¢uuõP öu›QÓx. BÚõÀ ÷|ØÖ |hzu¨£mh S¾UP¼À ö©õzu® 5 ÷£º ÷uº¢öukUP¨£mhÚº. C¢u I¢x ÷£›À |õßS÷£º uªÇP G®.¤.,UPÒ. £õ.á., uµ¨¤À J÷µ J¸ G®.¤.,US ©mk÷© ÷uºÁõQ²ÒÍõº. Auߣi v.•.P., G®.¤.,¯õÚ Q¸èn\õª, Põ[Qµì G®.¤.,UPÍõÚ ]zuß, Põº÷Á¢uß, C¢v¯ P®³Ûìm Pm] G®.¤.,¯õÚ A¨£õzxøµ BQ¯ |õßS ÷£¸® ÷\x \•zvµ vmhzøu Bu›zx ÷£_ÁuØS Áõ´¨¦ QøhzxÒÍx. £õ.á., uµ¨¤À uº÷©¢vµ ¤µuõß GßÓ J÷µ J¸ G®.¤., ©mk÷© ÷£\ Áõ´¨¦ QøhzxÒÍx. ÷\x \•zvµ vmh® öuõhº£õÚ \ºaø\ SÔzx AøÁ°À ¤µaøÚ Qͨ¤ Azvmhzøu Gvºzx ÷£\ ÷Áskö©Ú BÁ»õP C¸¢ux £õ.á., AuÚõÀ uõß öuõhº¢x C¨¤µaøÚø¯ øP°À ¤izxU öPõsk Gvº¨¦ Põmi PÁÚ Dº¨¦ wº©õÚ® öPõsk Á¢x, A¢u ÂÁõuzvß÷£õx Czvmhzøu \µ©õ›¯õP Gvºzx ÷£\»õ® GßÖ vmhªmk C¸¢ux. BÚõÀ uØ÷£õx Czvmhzøu 4 G®.¤.,UPÒ Bu›zx® J÷µ J¸ G®.¤. Gvºzx® ÷£_® {ø» HØ£mkÒÍx Gߣx SÔ¨¤hzuUPx. http://dinamalar.com/2007may09/political_ind1.asp  Parliament adjourned over Sethusamudram project

PTI | May 16, 2007 | 15:08 IST Opposition Bharatiya Janata Party and United Progressive Alliance-Left members clashed in Lok Sabha on Wednesday over the Sethusamudram project forcing its adjournment for the day, as the government said there was no evidence of any historical structure in the area. Trouble began when BJP leader V K Malhotra said the alignment of the project would “destroy the Ram Setu” (a mythological bridge connecting India and
Sri Lanka) and such a move would hurt “religious sentiments of the Hindus.”
This provoked Congress, Left and Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam members.Noisy protests from treasury benches prompted a similar response from the BJP forcing Speaker Somnath Chatterjee to adjourn the House, which was debating a calling attention motion on the matter, till 1400 hours.As soon as the House re-assembled, Malthora resumed his speech protesting vociferously against the project.However, members from DMK and Congress alleged the BJP was trying to derive political mileage over the issue.A K Krishnaswami (DMK) said BJP had kept quiet since July 2005 when the project was launched while S K Kharaventhan (Congress) said even the NDA regime had approved the scheme.In his reply, Shipping Minister T R Baalu quoted studies by Indian geological, archaeological and scientific institutes and the US National Aeronautics and Space Agency.“There is no Ram Setu and there is only the
Adam’s Bridge,” Baalu said drawing strong protests from BJP members who came into the well.
Despite the din, Deputy Speaker Charanjit Singh Atwal continued with the proceedings.He asked Baalu to put the Central Road Fund (Amendment) Bill, 2006, for passage. The bill was passed by a voice vote without discussion. Atwal then adjourned the House for the day.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: