Dr. B.P Radhakrishna, the doyen of modern-day geological publications in India, lamented for decades that geologists (sensu lato) of Indian origin or working in India, tended not to publish in Indian journals. A recent echo, "… India has 26 huge sedimentary basins with tremendous resources potential but still why the JGSI is not receiving manuscripts from Indian sedimentologists?" prompts this editorial. The editorial does not provide an answer to the question, which will need research by social scientists with a comprehensive survey. Instead, this editorial dwells on a few selected publications to illustrate the robustness of fundamental and transformative research in sedimentary geology with links to India. Many may not have received adequate attention.At a time when there was no adequate way to determine the mean of azimuthal data, such as in paleocurrent measurements, Sengupta and Rao (1966) and Rao and Sengupta (1972) devised a mathematical treatment of such data to find statistically valid means of cross-bedding azimuths of sandstones in the Kamthi Formation (Gondwana) in Pranhita-Godavari valley. This rigorous data treatment, understandably because of some perceived formidable mathematics, never caught on with field geologists nor with those measuring lineation, plunges of folds, quartz c-axis orientations, etc. However, the work has spawned a full-fledged sub-field in statistics to inquire into circularly distributed data (e.g., Jammalamadaka et al., 2021).In seminal papers, Bhatia established that geochemical compositions of siliciclastic rocks, especially the distribution of trace elements in them, indicated their tectonic provenance (Bhatia, 1983;Bhatia and Crook, 1986). This was at a time when the novel petrographic method of Dickinson and Suczek (1979) dazzlingly dominated the field of sandstone provenance. The geochemical method is, however, superior to the petrographic method principally for two reasons. First, the former determines the tectonic provenance of sandstones and mudstones, but the latter applies only to sandstones. Second, data acquisition for the former is objective although commonly dependent on unseen analysts, but that for the latter is subjective and depends on petrographic skills of the microscopist who is responsible for recognizing pseudomatrix, altered feldspars, chert, etc. and is adept at using the Gazzi-Dickinson method of point counting (Gazzi, 1966;Dickinson, 1970). The insight into implications of geochemical properties of the assemblages of rocks in different tectonic settings is now time-honored, the basis of the protocol for sedimentary provenance investigations. Codified with rigorous statistical constraints Verma