UP top court denied petition requesting to open 22 closed doors in mausoleum

12-03-2022

The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad court has rejected the petition which sought to open 22 closed rooms within the Taj Mahal to establish the presence of the idols of Hindu deities

The plea was filed by Rajneesh Singh, a BJP youth media in-charge, who sought the directions to the Archaeological Survey of India to probe the 22 closed doors within the historic monument. 

Citing claims by some historians and Hindu groups about the Taj Mahal being an old Shiv Temple, the plea sought the constitution of a fact-finding committee and therefore the submission

The petition has also sought setting aside certain provisions of the traditional and Historical Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains (Declaration of National Importance) Act 1951, and therefore the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act 1958, under which the mausoleum, Fatehpur Sikri, Agra Fort, Itimad-ud-Daulah's tomb were declared historical monuments.

The HC's order also comes days after BJP MP Diya Kumari claimed that the land on which the mausoleum was built originally belonged to the erstwhile Jaipur royalty and was acquired by Mughal emperor Emperor later.

She asserted that records of this are available with the family of Jaipur's ruler Jai Singh.

The MP had supported the plea within the HC and sought opening of the doors of the monument's "22 rooms" to work out "the truth, whatever it is".

“It should be investigated what was there before the monument was built and folks have the correct to grasp. There are records available with the Jaipur family and it might provide these if required," said Kumari, who is additionally a member of the erstwhile Jaipur royal house.

“Compensation was given in lieu of the land but what proportion was it, whether it had been accepted or not, I cannot say this because I've got not studied the records which are there in our 'pothikhana'. But the land belonged to our family and the Emperor had acquired it," she added.

She said that since there was no judiciary, no appeal could are made at that point. “Things are clear only after examining the records."