The legal tussle between the Archaeological Survey of India and the Sunni Waqf Board over ownership of the Taj Mahal took another bizarre turn on Tuesday, a week after the Supreme Court asked the Muslim organisation to present Emperor Shah Jahan's signature.
The board stated on Tuesday that it wouldn't stake claim to the ownership of the Taj as it belonged to the 'Almighty', but argued that it should be listed as Waqf property for all 'practical purposes'. The Supreme Court is hearing arguments in the case after the ASI filed a plea in 2010 following a Waqf Board decision claiming the monument as its property.
A bench—comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justice A.M. Khanwilkar and Justice D.Y. Chandrachud—said the board's claim that it was not staking claim to the property wouldn't help as the case was being heard. The court ordered the next hearing of the case would be on July 27.
In a hearing on April 11, the Supreme Court ordered the Waqf Board to produce Shah Jahan's signature to prove that the emperor had declared that the monument was Waqf land.
The ASI claims that if the Waqf Board is given ownership of the Taj, it would set a precedent at similar Mughal-era monuments such as the Red Fort and Fatehpur Sikri.
In a related development, a man claiming to be a great-grandson of the last Mughal Emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar claimed on Monday that the Waqf Board had no claims over the Taj and the disputed Babri Masjid land at Ayodhya.
Y.H. Tucy claimed the Taj was the nation's property and “no one could claim any right over it.” Tucy criticised the Waqf Board as “land grabber” that was grabbing media attention to create differences between Hindus and Muslims.
Tucy said he supported the building of a Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, claiming it would bring the communities closer.
(With agency inputs)