Introduction
A controversial plea has been submitted to the Allahabad High Court, requesting the appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to examine and photograph the Taj Mahal. The plea is linked to a civil suit asserting that the iconic monument was initially the Tejo Mahalaya, a Hindu temple dedicated to Lord Shiva.
Court Proceedings
Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal, presiding over the matter, has instructed the Union government and the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to provide their responses by filing counter-affidavits. The plea was introduced by the deity Lord Sri Agreshwar Mahadev Nagnatheshwar Virajman Tejo Mahalaya Temple Palace, represented through next friend Hari Shankar Jain and others. It contests the decisions of a trial court and a revisional court, which denied the request to appoint an Advocate Commissioner for inspecting the Taj Mahal.
Background of the Dispute
The origins of this legal battle trace back to a civil suit filed in Agra in 2015. In the suit, Hari Shankar Jain and other devotees alleged that the Taj Mahal was originally the Tejo Mahalaya, a Hindu temple dedicated to Lord Shiva, before being transformed into a mausoleum for Mumtaz Mahal under the rule of Mughal Emperor Shah Jahan. The petitioners are seeking a declaration acknowledging this claim, along with permission for Hindus to perform religious rituals such as darshan, pooja, and aarti within the monument.
Need for Inspection
The petitioners argue that inspecting the Taj Mahal is crucial to documenting architectural and structural features they believe support their case. They assert that these features cannot be sufficiently proven through oral testimony alone. Given that the Taj Mahal is a protected monument managed by the ASI, the petitioners contend they are unable to access or photograph the necessary areas independently for presentation in the trial court.
Judicial Rejections and Appeal
In 2017, an application was filed seeking the appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to inspect, photograph, and videograph the Taj Mahal, with a report to be submitted to the trial court. The trial court rejected this application in July 2019, citing a lack of justification for such an appointment. This decision was upheld by the Additional District Judge at Agra on April 4, 2026.
More Read
Current Appeal to the High Court
Dissatisfied with these rulings, the petitioners have approached the Allahabad High Court. They argue that both lower courts failed to consider whether a local investigation was essential for resolving the disputed issues, instead dismissing the application on grounds unrelated to its merits. The petition emphasizes that the physical and architectural features of the monument cannot be adequately proven through oral evidence alone.
Legal Precedent
The petition draws on the Supreme Court’s judgment in the Ayodhya title dispute, which acknowledged the authority of civil courts under Order XXVI Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure to appoint commissioners for local investigations when such actions are necessary to clarify matters in contention. The plea was presented by Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, with assistance from Advocate Saumya Srivastava.
