Taj Mahal originally temple? HC seeks response of Centre, ASI on inspection plea

Prayagraj: The Allahabad high court on Monday directed the central govt and the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to file their counter-affidavits in response to a petition challenging an Agra court order that refused to allow a survey of the Taj Mahal.The petition challenges the rejection of an application seeking the appointment of an advocate commissioner to conduct an inspection, photography and videography of the Taj Mahal.The petition has been filed on behalf of the deity “Lord Sri Agreshwar Mahadev Nagnatheswar Virajman” through its “next friend”, advocate Hari Shankar Jain, along with several devotees. The petitioners claimed that the monument is an ancient Hindu temple known as “Tejo Mahalaya” and dedicated to Lord Shiva.The order was passed by Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal after hearing advocate Hari Shankar Jain, who appeared for the petitioners.The petitioners have sought a declaration that the Taj Mahal is a Hindu temple and have requested that they, along with members of the Hindu community, be allowed to perform darshan and prayers within its premises.They have contended that Hindus have a fundamental right under Article 25 of the Constitution to perform darshan and puja at the monument.In 2019, the petitioners had moved an application before an Agra court seeking the appointment of an advocate commissioner to survey the Taj. However, the additional civil judge (senior division) rejected the application, holding that the plaintiffs had failed to produce revenue records such as khasra or khatauni to establish the exact gata number and that the boundaries and area of the property described by them did not match the defendants’ records.Subsequently, an additional district judge, Agra, dismissed their revision petition as not maintainable in April this year.Challenging both orders, the petitioners approached the HC, reiterating the historical and architectural claims made in the original suit.According to the petition, the ancient Tejo Mahalaya Temple, where the deity Agreshwar Mahadev Nagnatheswar Virajman is said to preside, was built by Raja Paramardi Dev in 1155-56 AD. It further claims that the monument later came under the ownership of Raja Man Singh and subsequently Raja Jai Singh of Jaipur.The petitioners have alleged that Mughal emperor Shah Jahan took over the structure from Raja Jai Singh and converted it into a mausoleum for his wife Mumtaz Mahal by incorporating Islamic architectural features.The petition also claims there are at least 109 archaeological and historical features that, according to the petitioners, establish that the monument was originally a Hindu temple.Among the features cited are the presence of a kalash atop the marble dome decorated with lotus petals, which the petitioners claim are characteristic of Hindu temple architecture. They also refer to a structure at the south-east corner of the complex, which they claim is recorded in ASI records as a “gaushala”, arguing that such a structure is associated with Hindu temples rather than Muslim mausoleums.The petition further alleges that the ASI has unlawfully permitted Muslims to offer namaz on Fridays while restricting visitors’ access and keeping several floors of the monument locked.The petitioners have argued that the Agra court’s order suffers from “patent illegality”, “material irregularity” and a failure to exercise jurisdiction. They contend that the application for appointment of an advocate commissioner was rejected on grounds irrelevant to such an exercise, particularly when there is no dispute regarding the identity of the monument.They have also submitted that since they do not have unrestricted access to the ASI-protected monument, the appointment of a court commissioner to conduct photography and videography is essential for the effective adjudication of the suit.The petitioners have, therefore, requested the HC to set aside the orders passed by the Agra courts and direct the trial court to decide their application for the appointment of an advocate commissioner on its merits.They have also filed an interim application seeking directions to the director of the ASI to photograph the interior and exterior of the monument in the presence of the petitioners and place those photographs before the HC.