S. H. Liu et al. [Phys. Rev. C 80, 044314 (2009)] have demonstrated that an accurate description of 137 I may be obtained within the shell model. It seems that they have missed one of the shell model calculations done earlier.They have also missed the earlier theoretical results for 139 Cs, where some of the levels observed in their work were predicted. The significant discrepancies observed between experimental and theoretical energies in the earlier shell model calculations [1] were interpreted as an indication that the excitation pattern of 137 I deviates from the shell model scheme. Liu et al. [2] have reported results of shell model (SM) calculations with modern realistic two-body interaction and a larger model space to explain the excitation spectra of 137 I and 139 Cs. The results show reasonable agreement with experimental data. They have demonstrated that an accurate description of 137 I may be obtained within the shell model. Interestingly, back in 2004, we did shell model calculations [3] for 137 I using the same model space, but with the empirical interaction SMN, proposed by us. The recent results of Liu et al.[2] predict the correct order for the 9/2 + and 11/2 + states and reproduce the 17/2 + -19/2 + splitting better than that reported by us. However, we got relatively better agreement for other states. The value of binding energy also agreed well * maitrayee.sahasarkar@saha.ac.in with data. Especially the differences between our calculated and experimental energies were considerably smaller for the 21/2 + -33/2 + states than the differences for their calculations. In the work by Liu et al. [2], the calculations of the mixing and branching ratios have given a more detailed evidence of the power of the shell model. Later in 2006, particle rotor model (PRM) calculations for a few nuclei in this mass region including 137 I and 139 Cs were done [4]. The issues of indication of the onset of collectivity in 137 I and deviation from the shell model results have been discussed at length in Ref.[4] while comparing the results from SM and PRM.