New Delhi: Amid the ongoing controversy over the publishing of the Keezhadi excavation report, the ASI will now send its internal committee to re-examine its earlier report on-site.
Yadubir Singh Rawat, director general of the Archaeological Survey of India, informed Lok Sabha MP D Ravikumar of the development in a letter dated 24 June. Ravikumar had written to the DG in May 2025 regarding the publishing of the report.
“Now it has been decided that the internal committee will re-examine the said report on site,” Rawat’s letter read.
The Keezhadi excavation report (2014-2015 and 2015-2016) submitted by archaeologist K Amarnath Ramkrishna sparked a controversy after Tamil Nadu politicians accused the ASI of suppressing Tamil heritage.
Last year, the ASI requested Ramkrishna for revisions to his 982-page report. But he refused.
In Parliament, this issue has also been raised several times. Last year, culture minister Gajendra Singh Shekhawat said in the Lok Sabha that there was no question of rejecting the report.
“The ASI is fully committed to following the law and due scientific process for releasing the accurate findings based on the excavation at Keezhadi,” Shekhawat said.
Keezhadi, near Madurai, has yielded significant archaeological findings, including evidence of a well-planned urban settlement dating back to the 8th-century BCE, potentially older than previously believed.
In his report, Ramkrishna classified Keezhadi into three periods: Pre-Early Historic (8th-century BCE to 5th-century BCE), Mature Early Historic (5th-century BCE to 1st-century BCE), and Post-Early Historic (1st-century BCE to 3rd-century CE).
However, ASI has decided that the nomenclatures of the three periods require change and the time bracket of the 8th-century BCE to 5th-century BCE is not justified at all.
Also Read: ASI puts out new tender for printing house. Reports from Rakhigarhi to Ropar are in limbo
ASI’s internal committee
The ASI appointed a five-member internal committee to evaluate Ramkrishna’s excavation report. The committee is headed by ASI’s Joint Director General and spokesperson Nandini Bhattacharya Sahu.
The Sahu committee will now visit Keezhadi to re-examine Ramkrishna’s report.
This is a rare incident in the ASI where a committee is visiting the excavation site to re-examine a submitted report.
Rawat, in his letter to the Tamil Nadu MP, wrote about “certain shortcomings” in the report.
“Certain deficiencies and shortcomings were identified in the report, which has been communicated to the excavator for necessary correction to make the report publication worthy; however, the excavator has not accepted,” reads Rawat’s letter, which ThePrint viewed.
Ramkrishna’s report was based on work conducted during 2014-15 and 2015-16. His report was vetted by two subject experts and examined by an internal committee of experts.
Last year, the then Chief Minister MK Stalin raised questions on the delay of publishing the excavation report of Keezhadi.
“Keezhadi is more than just mud and pottery; it serves as a mirror reflecting a 3,000-year-old Tamil civilisation that was urban, literate, and thriving long before the myths of the Ganges Valley,” Stalin said in 2025.
(Edited by Insha Jalil Waziri)