Keezhadi site under water: Madras High Court bench seeks Tamil Nadu's view
Madurai: Serious concerns over inundation of the excavated archaeological site at Keezhadi near Madurai were expressed during the hearing of a case filed in the Madurai bench of the Madras High court by Chennai-based advocate, who sought to set up a site museum to preserve the ancient artifacts in the same place instead of shifting them to ASI head office at Bengaluru.
Ms. Kanimozhi Mathi, lawyer, who visited the Keezhadi site two days ago, urged a division bench here, comprising Justice MM Sundresh and Sathish Kumar on Wednesday to issue orders to Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to protect the trenches, which were under the excavation, because it was found inundated due to recent rains.
About 5,300 artifacts have been unearthed at Keezhadi during the first two phase of the excavation which proved to the world that an ancient urban civilization had existed in Tamil Nadu since the Sangam age along Vaigai. And the third phase was underway.
The advocate also claimed that the artifacts were also not kept in a protected environment, as she found them covered with just plastic sheets near the site. So far the ASI officials had not taken steps to shift the artifacts to the museum at Sivaganga, she added.
Recording this observation, Justice Sundresh advised P S Sirraman, superintending archaeologist, ASI, Keezhadi site, to take steps to protect the trenches under excavation and to keep it open for people to visit and learn from it. A police personnel should be appointed to be stationed permanently in the site, said the judge.
The Judge also cited the examples of Harappa and Mohenjadaro, the ancient archaeological sites in India, to stress the importance of keeping the excavation sites open, which itself signifies its historicity.
Sirraman, who was present in the court, said that ASI would do so if the excavation was done on government land, but the land under excavation at Keezhadi belongs to private parties.
However, advocate Kanimozhi argued that the land owners were willing to sell it if the government paid them adequate compensation.
Taking note of this, Justice Sundresh observed that the Keezhadi site was of great public interest.
The superintending archaeologist informed the court that a community hall near the site could be used to preserve the artifacts if the state government gave the permission.
The court directed the additional advocate general, B. Pugazhendhi to seek the government's view in this regard. The AAG and Central government standing counsel were also directed to inspect Konthagai, the place identified for setting up the site museum and submit a report. The court posted the next hearing to September 11.
