New Delhi, Sep 14 (UNI) Faced with widespread criticism over the Ram Sethu affidavit fiasco, the Congress has asked the government to find out if the reference to Lord Ram "erroneously" in the counter-affidavit filed before the Supreme Court was a "genuine mistake" or an "exercise to sabotage" the image of the Centre.
Top Congress sources said a possible sabotage could not be ruled out as the name of Lord Ram was "unnecessarily" mentioned in the affidavit as the issue before the court was only due Ramsethu.
The Party believes that the controversy created over the stand of the Archaeological Survey of India questioning the historical existence of Lord Rama nd other characters and events depicted in the Holy Ramayana, would certainly damage the image of the party.
It was also confirmed that the Congress had asked the government to fix responsibility over the affidavit fiasco after looking into how the "mistake" had crept into the affidavit. "The process of fixing responsibility is going on," a party leader said.
UPA Chairperson and Congress President Sonia Gandhi yesterday asked the government to look into the matter when the Sangh Parivar made an issue out of the affidavit. Within hours, the government had announced that it would remove the "objectionable" portions from the counter affidavit and file a revised affidavit.
Meanwhile, AICC Spokesman Abishek Manu Singhvi said UPA deserved "kudos" for the speed with which its government had rectified the mistake of 'erroneously" referring to Lord Ram in the counter-affidavit.
"The government does not deserve criticism as it had acted with alacrity to correct the mistake," Mr Singhvi told mediapersons, while adding that "make it an issue further is nothing but politicising it." "To err is human, but to rectify error is divine," he said, pointing out that the Congress was the first to ask the government to take steps to correct the mistake which has led to the withdrawal of the objectional portions today from the counter-affidavit filed on Wednesday.
Dr Singhvi said the name of Lord Ram was mentioned in the affidavit, though it was not an issue raised by the court.
"The whole point is that Lord Ram is irrelevant to adjudication and in this proceeding." UNI