New Delhi: Alleging that several panel members have biased views, former Union Minister Subramaniam Swamy on Tuesday moved the Supreme Court seeking quashing of the 'Committee of Eminent Persons' constituted by the Centre to examine the contentious 'Ram Sethu' bridge relating to the Sethusamudram project.

In an interlocutory application, Swamy submitted that the committee constituted on October 5 by the Centre was "vitiated by non-inclusion of certain expertise which is essential to address the criticisms that had compelled the Government to keep the project on hold."

Swamy alleged that many of the committee members including its chairman S Ramachandran, other members like M Sakhtivel, Dilip K Biswas, J R B Alfred, S R Wate and R C Sharma have strong views for continuing with the project at the cost of destruction to the 'Ram Setu' bridge.

Following a public outcry over the Centre's affidavit in the apex court that disputed the existence of Lord Rama and other Ramayana characters, the Government beat a hasty retreat by withdrawing the affidavit and keeping the project under hold for three months.

It assured the apex court that a committee comprising eminent personalities would be constituted to examine the claims and counter-claims on the 'Ram Setu' before taking a further decision on the issue.

Accordingly on October 5, the committee was constituted by the Centre with 10 members.

According to Swamy, Ramachandran had headed the Environmental Impact Study Committee under the National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI), Nagpur that had actually recommended the controversial canal alignment.

He submitted Ramachandran had gone on record several times publicly espousing the cause of the Centre on the viability of the project, including the controversial alignment over the "Ram Setu" bridge.

The interlocutory application quoted a signed press statement purportedly issued by Ramachandran on June 27 wherein he had stated, "We, the scientists having expertise in the field of geology and oceanography confirm that Adam's Bridge (Ram Sethu) is purely of barrier islands formed due to natural process."

As regards S R Wate, the application stated he was the deputy director of NEERI, that had given clearance for blasting the rocks, which according to opponents of the projects, would destroy the fragile ecology of the region.

Swamy further submitted that another member R C Sharma was an "anti-Hindu Marxist" historian and has appeared as a witness in the Ramajanmabhoomi case to rubbish claims of a Hindu structure underlying the demolished Babri Masjid.

"He has actually queried the historicity of Shri Rama and Shri Krishna. Thus his views on the historicity of Rama Setu must naturally be one-sided and would lead to a reasonable apprehension of bias, thereon," the application said.

The application complained that neither a single archaeologist of repute has been included in the committee, nor did it include conservationists or scientists from organisations such as the National Institute of Ocean Technology or the Geological Survey of India who could give a balanced view on the subject.

Hence, it urged the apex court to quash the present committee and direct the setting up of a fresh panel.

Source : PTI