The iconic Taj Mahal was the subject of public interest litigation (PIL) on Monday, but the Supreme Court declined to take it on the grounds that it is not the role of the courts to judge the “real age” and “real history” of such monuments.
“Do not drag courts into everything. Can we determine what is the age of the Taj Mahal or the historical facts behind it after 400 years?” a bench of justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar asked the counsel appearing for the Haryana-based petitioner Surjit Yadav.
Yadav’s lawyer argued that the petition’s goal was to have schools educate the “correct facts” on the monument from the 17th century.
. He added the plea seeks to determine whether the structure existed before Mughal emperor Shah Jahan got the Taj Mahal built.
But the bench remained unimpressed. “See your prayers…remove wrong facts? Who will decide what is the correct fact? Will you decide? Is it the job of a court?”
The attorney decided to drop the PIL after observing the court’s apparent lack of interest, stating that his client would prefer to make the argument to the Archaeological Survey of India.
The top court turned down Rajneesh Singh’s plea regarding the Taj Mahal in October as well. Singh is the media coordinator for the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJPAyodhya )’s unit. Singh demanded that 22 Taj Mahal halls and suites be made accessible. He also asked for a fact-finding group to investigate into the monument’s past.
The Supreme Court dismissed Singh’s case on October 21 and warned the BJP leader against submitting petitions in a “casual” way, referring to it as a “publicity interest litigation.”
