Taj Mahal or ‘Tejo Mahalaya’? The legal tussle explained

The story so far

The seventeenth-century tomb Taj Mahal is in the news once again. Earlier this month, the Allahabad High Court issued notice to the Center and the Archaeological Survey of India asking them to respond to a plea challenging the Agra court’s order rejecting surveys at the Taj Mahal. Following lawyer Harishankar Jain’s petition claiming that the Taj, a UNESCO World Heritage monument, is actually a Tejo Mahalaya, the Bench of Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal gave the verdict.

Also Read | Plea in HC’s plea that Taj Mahal was built on Raja Man Singh’s estate

Mr. Jain pleaded for a declaration that the Taj Mahal was a Hindu temple and sought permission for Hindus to worship there. The petitioners also requested the appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to inspect the monument and conduct photography and video shooting.

first quarrel

It took 22 years to complete the Taj Mahal, which was built by Mughal emperor Shah Jahan as the tomb of his favorite wife, Arjumand Bano. Land for this was procured from Mirza Raja Jai ​​Singh of Amber, who was compensated by Shah Jahan through four havelis from his imperial estate. Built under the direction of the chief architect Ustad Ahmed Lahori, the Taj’s architect first became a matter of controversy when it was claimed by many in the West to be the Venetian Geronimo Veroneo, a jeweler by profession. This was in the 17th century. Then came Babur Bey’s claim in History of Taj Mahal that the Taj was designed by the architect Muhammad Efendi, who was allegedly sent by the Sultan of Türkiye. However, the Effendi was not an architect, as later statements proved.

Editorial | Deceptive controversy: At the Taj Mahal

Later, in the mid-19th century, it was claimed that the monument was the result of the genius of the Frenchman Austin de Bordeaux, a goldsmith by profession. However, Austin died in 1632, the year work on the Taj began.

Oak’s claim

No historian of medieval India disputed the fact that the Taj was the tomb of the wife of the Mughal emperor Shah Jahan. This includes renowned historians Irfan Habib and Athar Ali, as well as well-known names like Satish Chopra and Syed Ali Nadeem Rezavi. The first person to slander the authenticity of the tomb was the non-historian, teacher-turned-lawyer-turned-journalist PN Oak. Taj Mahal is a Temple PalaceIn 1965 he claimed that the Taj was originally a Rajput palace built in the 4th century. Nearly 24 years later, in 1989, Oak revised his idea and claimed that it was actually a Hindu temple built in the early 12th century. He wrote a book again Taj Mahal: The True Storyto support his claim. It was the first time the monument was associated with a Hindu deity. Historians have dismissed his claims as unconvincing in the absence of any evidence.

However, Oak’s claim was heard in the High Court, which rejected it outright in 2000, describing the allegations as “a bee in the hood”.

More legal cases

In 2005, Amarnath Mishra, now a member of the Ayodhya Sadbhavna Samiti, approached the Allahabad High Court, claiming that the Taj was a temple built by the Chandela rulers in 1189. The court also rejected his claim.

The opponents did not give up. In 2015, there was a civil case filed in the Agra court seeking to declare the Taj Mahal a Hindu temple. However, the court did not accept this claim. After refusing to conduct a survey of the Taj premises as ordered in Gyanvapi and Bhojshala, the petitioners approached the Allahabad High Court. The court then sought responses from the Union Government and the Archaeological Survey of India.

ASI stand

In 2017, the Archaeological Survey of India clearly stated that the Taj was a 17th-century tomb. The technology used in its construction and design, including the pietra dura, was not available in pre-medieval days. All arguments had to end. However, in 2022, a PIL was filed in the Supreme Court by the Bharatiya Janata Party leader. That too was rejected. Two years later, some activists tried to offer Gangajal at the Taj. This attempt also failed. In short, the monument was not included in the state government’s tourist brochure in 2017. Now, as per the Allahabad High Court order, the ball is again in the Centre’s court, out of ASI. Justice Agarwal issued notices on behalf of the deity Lord Sri Agreshwar Mahadev Nagnatheswar Virajman regarding the plea made through the “next friend”, the Jain advocate, and other devotees.