The Delhi High Court has instructed the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to address a representation by Surjit Singh Yadav, President of the Hindu Sena, who has raised concerns about what he claims are “wrong historical facts” regarding the construction of the Taj Mahal by Shah Jahan. The division bench, comprising Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, has resolved a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Yadav, who is seeking the rectification of historical information pertaining to the iconic monument in school and college history books.
Yadav, after withdrawing his petition from the Supreme Court last December, which sought directions for ASI to ascertain the “correct age” of the Taj Mahal, had approached the ASI with a representation on January 7. His case is built on the assertion that there is no historical evidence to support the demolition of a palace belonging to Raja Man Singh and the construction of the Taj Mahal on the same site.
The petitioner has called for an ASI-led investigation into the age of the Taj Mahal, including the existence of Raja Man Singh’s palace as of December 31, 1631, and for a report to be submitted to the court. Additionally, he has requested the Central Government to publish the “correct history” of Raja Man Singh’s palace, which he claims was renovated by Shah Jahan from 1632 to 1638, citing references from the ‘Padshahnama’ by Abdul Hamid Lahori and Qazwini.
Yadav’s plea states,
“Because the people have a Right to Know about the true facts and information related to the history of construction of Taj Mahal and non-disclosure of the same or putting across incorrect facts related to Taj Mahal’s construction in the public domain would deprive the people of true knowledge of the actual historical facts about the construction of Taj Mahal and this would be absolute violation of Article 21 and Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India.”
He has also contested the ASI’s information on its website, which states that the Taj Mahal’s construction was completed in 1648 after approximately 17 years. Yadav argues that the Tomb of Mumtaz Mahal was nearly complete by 1638, thus the historical fact propagating a 17-year period for the construction of the Taj Mahal is “factually incorrect.”
In his research, Yadav refers to the book ‘Taj Museum’ by ZA Desai, which suggests that the burial site for Mumtaz Mahal was a mansion (manzil) of Raja Man Singh, in the possession of his grandson Raja Jai Singh at the time. He emphasizes that this mansion was never demolished, stating,
“Further, the book titled Taj Museum mentions that the dead body of Mumtaz Mahal was interred under a temporary domed structure within the land premises of Raja Jai Singh. It is pertinent to mention that there is no account which states that the mansion of Raja Man Singh was demolished to construct Taj Mahal.”
The plea by Yadav has brought forth a discussion on the veracity of historical accounts and the responsibility of state institutions in preserving and presenting history. The Delhi High Court’s decision to pass the matter to the ASI signifies a step towards examining and potentially revising the historical narrative of one of India’s most celebrated monuments.
