Taj Mahal 'history' case: Hearing postponed to May 12 due to lawyers' protest

Taj Mahal 'history' case: Hearing postponed to May 12 due to lawyers' protest

The writ petition was filed on Saturday in the registry of the Lucknow bench of the High Court by Rajneesh Singh, who is the media in-charge of the BJP's Ayodhya unit

FPJ Web DeskUpdated: Tuesday, May 10, 2022, 03:20 PM IST
article-image
Taj Mahal, Agra |

Lucknow: Hearing on the plea seeking a fact-finding inquiry into the "history" of the Taj Mahal filed in the Allahabad High Court was deferred to Thursday as lawyers boycotted work.

The writ petition was filed on Saturday in the registry of the Lucknow bench of the High Court by Rajneesh Singh, who is the media in-charge of the BJP's Ayodhya unit.

The plea was listed before justice D K Upadhyay and justice Subhash Vidyarthi for the day. It sought a fact-finding inquiry into the "history" of the Taj Mahal, and also opening of the doors of its "22 rooms" to see "the truth, whatever it is".

Several right-wing outfits have claimed in the past that the Mughal-era mausoleum was a Lord Shiva temple However, lawyers of the Allahabad High Court, both in Prayagraj and Lucknow, boycotted work on Tuesday to protest against the inordinate time being taken in listing of fresh cases by the registry of the high court.

The complainant said, "In the petition, I have demanded that the 22 doors of rooms of the monument which are closed should be opened to see the truth, whatever it is".

The monument is protected by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI).

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

RECENT STORIES

Bombay HC Refuses Interim Relief To Filmmaker Ramesh Sippy In Family Assets Case

Bombay HC Refuses Interim Relief To Filmmaker Ramesh Sippy In Family Assets Case

Mumbai: POCSO Court Sentences 2 Men To 10 Years In Prison For Eve-Teasing & Sexual Harassment Of...

Mumbai: POCSO Court Sentences 2 Men To 10 Years In Prison For Eve-Teasing & Sexual Harassment Of...

Bombay High Court Upholds ₹3 Crore Compensation & Monthly Maintenance Under Domestic Violence Act

Bombay High Court Upholds ₹3 Crore Compensation & Monthly Maintenance Under Domestic Violence Act

Bombay High Court Questions Panvel Municipal Corporation's Retroactive Property Tax Demand

Bombay High Court Questions Panvel Municipal Corporation's Retroactive Property Tax Demand

Residents Cannot Be Penalised For Authorities' Delay In Executing Public Amenities Works: Bombay...

Residents Cannot Be Penalised For Authorities' Delay In Executing Public Amenities Works: Bombay...