Archaeology of Rama Setu? Writes Sri T. Satyamurthy, retired ASI Archaeologist
I had the opportunity to be an Archaeologist in Archaeological Survey of India since 1970, and recently retired and would like to bring out the following facts about Ramar Sethu Issue. To my knowledge no archaeological expedition of any type either on Shore or off shore was conducted to document the facts about the Ramar Sethu Bridge. Neither there is any official publication on the type of Remains there.
I was shocked to see the Affidavit filed by ASI in the Apex Court. It was based on secondary resources from some other Agency. None of Archaeologists, especially my old colleagues could have gone to that level to file a casual Affidavit in the highest court of the country. To my solace, now it is learnt that the officials involved both are not Archaeologists but Administrative Officers. One is an Assistant Director and another is Director Administration. The latter is from Indian Revenue Service and entered the Survey on Deputation few months back and bypassed the Senior Archaeologists of ASI and misinformed the Apex Court. The decline of the standard of ASI is not a sudden one, but for the past two decades Archaeologist is not allowed to head it. Due to some flaw in the Central Recruitment Rules amended during 1980s, no Archaeologist is made eligible to be the Director General and IAS personnel lead it one by one with out even basic knowledge on History or Archaeology.
They represent the Nation in many International Bodies like UNESCO on Archaeological matters and misrepresent the facts many times. This time due to sensitivity of the Subject they were trapped in the Apex Court. No Governement including BJP ever attempted to post a technical DGA. We hope atleast now the Government will wake up to restore the lost glory of the Survey.
T.Satyamurthy
Superintending Archaeologist (Rtd), ASI,
26/43, Janakiraman Street, West Mambalam
Chennai.33
I was shocked to see the Affidavit filed by ASI in the Apex Court. It was based on secondary resources from some other Agency. None of Archaeologists, especially my old colleagues could have gone to that level to file a casual Affidavit in the highest court of the country. To my solace, now it is learnt that the officials involved both are not Archaeologists but Administrative Officers. One is an Assistant Director and another is Director Administration. The latter is from Indian Revenue Service and entered the Survey on Deputation few months back and bypassed the Senior Archaeologists of ASI and misinformed the Apex Court. The decline of the standard of ASI is not a sudden one, but for the past two decades Archaeologist is not allowed to head it. Due to some flaw in the Central Recruitment Rules amended during 1980s, no Archaeologist is made eligible to be the Director General and IAS personnel lead it one by one with out even basic knowledge on History or Archaeology.
They represent the Nation in many International Bodies like UNESCO on Archaeological matters and misrepresent the facts many times. This time due to sensitivity of the Subject they were trapped in the Apex Court. No Governement including BJP ever attempted to post a technical DGA. We hope atleast now the Government will wake up to restore the lost glory of the Survey.
T.Satyamurthy
Superintending Archaeologist (Rtd), ASI,
26/43, Janakiraman Street, West Mambalam
Chennai.33
