Live
- MyVoice: Views of our readers 28th April 2024
- Breaking glass ceiling in leadership roles
- Anakapalli: Sharmila assures Congress will bring back lost glory of Andhra Pradesh
- Mega Prince Varun Tej campaign in Pithapuram
- Saving India’s wild ‘unicorns’
- Khammam mostly sent imported leaders to LS
- Vijayawada: BJP, Congress vie with each other to woo voters
- Nellore: Jagan’s manifesto has no vision for AP says Chandrababu Naidu
- Amaravati: YSRCP firm on 3Cs
- 10 Tried-and-Tested Home Remedies for Toothaches
Shahajhan never constructed Taj Mahal, carried out renovation of Raja Man Singh palace: PIL in Delhi HC
A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been moved in the Delhi High Court, seeking the removal of what is claimed to be “wrong historical facts” related to the construction of the Taj Mahal by Shah Jahan from history books used in schools and colleges.
New Delhi: A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been moved in the Delhi High Court, seeking the removal of what is claimed to be “wrong historical facts” related to the construction of the Taj Mahal by Shah Jahan from history books used in schools and colleges.
“To issue writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to remove wrong historical facts related to construction of Taj Mahal by Shahajahan from the books of history and text books referred in the schools, colleges, universities and other institutions,” the PIL urges the court.
Surjit Singh Yadav, the President of the NGO Hindu Sena S, has sought court’s direction to the Respondent to bring in public domain the correct historical facts relating to the existence of the palace of Raja Man Singh on the land where Taj Mahal exists and also to incorporate the correct historical fact that “Shahajhan never constructed Taj Mahal except carried out the renovation of the palace of Raja Man Singh.”
He has argued that there is no historical evidence supporting the demolition of Raja Man Singh's palace and the subsequent construction of the Taj Mahal on the same site.
The PIL by Yadav seeks a court direction for the Archaeological Survey of India to investigate the age of the Taj Mahal and the existence of Raja Man Singh's palace as of December 31, 1631, and to submit a report to the court.
“To issue direction to the Archeological Survey of India to carry out investigation about the age of Taj Mahal including existence of palace of Raja Man Singh… on the site of Taj Mahal, in Agra and to file a report before this Hon'ble Court.”
Furthermore, the petitioner requests that the Central Government publish the correct history of Raja Man Singh's palace, which was allegedly renovated by Shah Jahan between 1632 and 1638, citing the book "Padshahnama" authored by Abdul Hamid Lahori and Qazwini.
“... to publish the correct history of the palace of Raja Man Singh (which had been renovated by Shahajhan w.e.f. 1632 to 1638) and these facts can be culled out from the book namely Padshahnama authored by court chroniclers historian Abdul Hamid Lahori & Qazwini respectively,” PIL says.
Yadav claims that the information presented in the plea is derived from public records, RTI applications, websites, and historical books.
The plea argues that people have a right to know the true historical facts about the construction of the Taj Mahal, and any non-disclosure or dissemination of incorrect information would violate Article 21 and Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution.
The petitioner also disputes the information provided by the Archaeological Survey of India on its website, asserting that it took approximately 17 years to complete the Taj Mahal in 1648, while claiming that the Tomb of Mumtaz Mahal was nearly complete by 1638.
Therefore, the PIL contends that the commonly propagated historical fact about the 17-year construction period of the Taj Mahal is factually incorrect.
The respondents in the PIL include the Central Government, the Archaeological Survey of India, the National Archives of India, and the State of Uttar Pradesh.
