IN THE HON’BLE HIGHCOURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 36818 of 2004 (Under Article226 of constitution of India) (District –Agra) Institute of Rewriting Indian HistoryThrough its Founder President, P. N. Oak. S/O Late Shri NageshKrishna Oak, R/O - Plot No. 10, Goodwill Society, Aundh, Pune – 411007 and another VERSUS Union of India through Secretary,HumanResources and Development (HRD.),Governmentof India, New Delhi. And others …………...Respondents1. 2. Thatthe petitioners has no other efficacious remedy , expect to file the presentWrit Petition on the following and other grounds:- GroundsA. Because truth will not make us rich, but it willcertainly make us free. The wrong historical data leads to the horror, as wehave seen during the period of demolition of the Babri Masjid. There has beennumber of concomitant given by the respective community representing to thefollower of two prominent religions, but the loss that we have suffered in theshape of hatred between the two section of the society, cannot be compensatedwithout revealing the truth. Unfortunately, the term Hindu communalism is moreexaggerated by the fanaticism under the garb of secularism, while the Hinducommunity as a whole has always been receptive to all the religion.B. Because Article 25 of the constitution in Indiasecures to every person, subject of course to public order, health and moralityand other provisions of Part III, including Article 17 freedom to entertain andexhibit outward acts as well as propagate and disseminate such religious beliefaccording to his judgement and conscience for edification of others. The rightof the State to impose such restrictions as are desired or found necessary ongrounds of public order, health, and morality is inbuilt in Arts. 25 and 26itself. Article 25(2)(b) ensures the right of the State to make a law providingfor social welfare and reforms besides throwing open of Hindu religiousinstitutions of a public character to classes and sections of Hindus and anysuch rights of State or of the communities or classes of the society were alsoconsidered to need due regulation in the process of harmonizing the variousrights.C. Because every citizen of India is fundamentallyobligated to develop a scientific temper and humanism .He is fundamentally dutybound to strive towards excellence, in all sphere of individual and collectiveactivity, so that the nation constantly rises to the higher level of endeavorand achievements. Everyone, whether individually or collectively isunquestionably under the supremacy of law. However it is true that exaggerateddevotion to the rule of benefit must not nurture fanciful doubts or lingeringsuspicion and thereby destroy social defense, as the curiosity cannot be thesubject matter of fair criticism. Thus the conclusion derived that on one hand,every citizen is having the freedom of speech and expression so far as they donot contravene the statutory limits and may prevail in the atmosphere with outany hindrance.D. Because public education is essential forfunctioning of the process of popular government and to assist the discovery oftruth and strengthening the capacity of individual in participating in decisionmaking process .The decision making process include the right to know also andpushing the protection beyond the primary level betrays the bigwigs desire tokeep the crippled more crippled forever. The education of spritualism is thefoundation for value based survival of human being in a civilized society. Theforce and section behind civilized society depend upon moral value; and themorality cannot be cultivated through the falsehood of ideological barrier.Thus the children may not be required to read such facts, which are having thefoundation of falsehood.E. Because in Bijoe Emmanuel vs State ofKerala (1986) 3 SCC 615, the questionraised in the aforesaid case, as to whether three children who were faithful to“Jehovah’s witnesses” may refuse to sing our national anthem or salute thenational flag of our country despite being the student in the school, whereduring morning assembly, the national anthem is sung by other children. Thecircular issued by the Director of Public Instruction, Kerala providedobligation of school children to sing the National Anthem. Thus these childrenwere expelled. The Hon’ble Supreme court while setting aside the aforesaidorder of expulsion of the children from the school was pleased to examine, asto whether the children faithful to “Jehovah’s witnesses”, a worldwide sect ofChristianity may be compelled against tenets of their religious faith dulyrecognized and well established all over the world which was upheld by thehighest court in United States of America, Australia and Canada and findrecognition in Encyclopedia Britannica. It was held that the appellants trulyand conscientiously believed that their religion does not permit them to joinany rituals except it them in their prayers to Jehovah, their God. Though theirreligious beliefs may appear strange, the sincerity of their beliefs is beyondquestion. They do not hold their beliefs idly and their conduct is not theoutcome of any perversity. The appellants have not asserted the beliefs for thefirst time or out of any unpatriotic sentiments. Their objection to sing is notjust against the National Anthem of India. They have refused to sing otherNational Anthems elsewhere. They are law abiding and well-behaved children, whodo stand respectfully and would continue to do so, when National Anthem issung. Their refusal, while so standing to join in the singing of the NationalAnthem is neither disrespectful of it, nor inconsistent with the FundamentalDuty under Article 51 A (a). Hence no action should have been taken againstthem.F. Because the concept of sovereignty was presentfrom the ancient time but the sovereignty was conferred upon an individual whois suppress the wicked and is recognized as great resources in itself like thegod of fire, air, sun, moon and religion. The religion in the ancient time wasconsidered as spiritualism and it was not dependent upon any ritual ceremony,but it was considered s the knowledge in the darkness of ignorance andinjustice. The sovereignty was supposed to promote the cause of the religion,wealth and enjoyment of life and those, who were voluptuous, malicious, mean,and low-minded, were ruined by the retributive justice.G. Because the apex court held in RamSharanAutyanuprasi’s case 1989 (Supp.) (1) SCC 251/AIR 1989 S.C 549 , that men’s lifeis inclusive of his tradition , culture and heritage and protection of thatheritage in its full measure would certainly come within the encompass of anexpanded concept of Article 21 of the ConstitutionH. Because the mankind must be satisfied with thereasonableness within reach and the decision-making process may belong to theknowledge of the law. Thus the reasonableness and the rationality, legality, aswell as philosophically, provide colour to the meaning of fundamental right.The concept of equality is not doctrinaire approach. It is a binding threat, whichruns through the entire constitutional text thus the affirmative action may beconstitutionally valid and the same cannot ignore the constitutional morality,which embraces in-itself the doctrine of inequality. It would beconstitutionally immoral to perpetuate inequality among majority .Theconstitution is required to kept young energetic and alive. The attempt beendure to expand the ambit of fundamental right. It is said that the dignity ofthe ocean lies not in its fury capable of causing destruction, but in its vastextent and depth with enormous tolerance. Thus the wider the power, the higherthe need of caution and care while exercising the power.I. Because the Student/children, the futurecitizens under taking the education of Indian History on the misconception/pattern of Anglo Saxon teaching meant for division of Indian society on thepolicy of “Divide and Rule”. There is a important question posed as to whetherwe have actually gain our independence or we have to under take another journeyfull of animosity, aggressism on account of terrorism and fanatic ideology aprevalent throughout the World of a particular religion.J. Because this writ petition is moved in thePublic Interest, for a National Cause, to establish the truth there is noprivate interest or any other oblique motive, or any other personal gain. Thepetitioner institution, known as Institute for Re-writing Indian History,Thane, having registration no.F-1128 (T) is a public trust. The founderpresident of the trust is Shri P.N. Oak S/o Late Shri Nagesh Krishna Oak, R/o-Plot no. 10, Goodwill Society, Aundh, Pune.411007, who has written number ofbooks namely 1. World Vedic Heritage, 2. The Tajmahal is a Temple Place, 3.SomeBlunders of Indian Historical Research, 4. Flowers Howlers, 5. Learning VedicAstrology, 6. Some Missing Chapters of World History, 7. Agra red Fort is aHindu Building, 8.Great Britain was Hindu Land, 9. The Taj Mahal isTejomahalaya a Shiva Temple, 10.Who Says Akbar was Great, 11. Vedic Guide toHealth, Beauty, Longevity and Rejuvenation, 12. Islamic Havoc in IndianHistory.K. Because the petitioner No. 2 is the founderPresident of an Institution, namely, “ Institute for Re-writing Indian (andWorld) History “. The aim and objective of that institution, which is a registeredsociety having register no. F-1128 (T) as the public trust under the provisionof Bombay Public Trust Act. Inter alia, is to re-discover the Indian history.The monumental places of historical importance in their real and trueperspective having of the heritage of India.L. Because the‘ research paper’ of the author on the subject that the so-called “Taj Mahal “ is not a monument built by anInvader Emperor in memory of his late wife but a Hindu Shiva Temple which wasconverted into a love-memorial by a Invader Emperor.M. Because the freedom of speech and expression isbasic to indivisible from a democratic polity .It includes right to impart andreceive information. Restriction to the said right could be only as provided inarticle 19(2). The old dictum let the people have the truth and the freedom todiscuss it and all will go well with the Government. It should prevail. Thetrue test for deciding the validity is whether it takes away or abridgesfundamental right of the citizens. If there were direct abridgement of thefundamental right of freedom of speech and expression, the law would beinvalid.N. the ambit and scope of “Right to Know “ isconferred fundamental right under Article 19 (1)(a),25 and26 read with Article49 and 51-A(f) (h) of the Constitution of India; read with the provision ofFreedom of Information Act, 2002 .The right to get information in democracy isrecognized all throughout and it is a natural right flowing from the concept ofdemocracy itself. Freedom of expression may be necessarily included in theright of information. There is no expression with out having an idea on thesubject, regarding which the expression of an individual may be given effect tochange the existing values of ideology, which are based on the notable extractsof certain facts. An enlightening informed citizen would undoubtedly enhancedemocratic values.O. Because the GovernorGeneral, Lord Auckland, and young lieutenant Alexander Cunningham conceivedindigenous scheme of misusing the archaeological studies. This young Cunnigham,an army engineer had no training in the archaeological department, he wrote alengthy letter dated September 15, 1842 suggesting archeological exploration inIndia. This letter is reproduced on page no 246 Volume 7 journal of Royal AsiaticSociety, London, and 1843 A.D. It discloses that the purpose of archeologicalexploration in India is neither the study; nor preservation of historicalmonuments, but to use archeology as the imperial tool to create mutualdissension and resentment between Buddhists, Jains and other Hindu withInvaders by falsely crediting all monuments to the authorship to alien invaderswhile few may be labeled as that of being constructed by Buddhist or Jain, butnot by Hindus.P. Because ithas been disclosed during the High level Committee Meeting at Paris during theconvention of United Nation Education Science and Cultural Organisation(UNESCO) that near Anoop Talab (Pond), there has been the ancient palatialbuilding and the ancient cultural activities remain in existance prior to theperiod of invasion by the Mughal invaders. The historian have related them backto the existence of all such palatial building during the period of Sikarwar,Rajput, which find support by the research were conducted Prof. Ram Nathan historianof Rajasthan University, Jaipur and also by Dr. Pratima Asthana, Ex ViceChancellor of Gorakhpur University.Q. Because one great tragedy of Indian history hasbeen that while Indians remained subdued and gagged under alien domination forover a millenium foreigners, who wielded all power in India played great havocwith Indian history merrily destroying or distorting it at their sweetwilleither out of sheer cunning and cussedness or through their colossal ignoranceand wanton barbarism.R. Because that life includes all the meaning givento a man’s life including his tradition, culture and hertiage and protection ofthat heritage in its full measure squarely comes within the encompass of theextended concept of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.S. Because that the Taj Mahal, is a mark of historyof hertiage and the glorious achievement of Indian Art and Archaeology, and hasto be named and recognised in its true perspective and origin as a monument ofworld important must not be allowed to be the victim subject of an “Historicalfraud” as an infringement of Indian tradition and heritage if the said monumentis wrongly and falsely indentifing and reconized as a mausoleum giving a go byeto its origin and actual creation as a Palace/Temple in redemption of fact andrestoration of history.T. Because the history of one’s heritage has to berewritten to give a true and correct account of the facts and figures,achievements and failures, conquest end the defeat.as
the Taj Mahal was notbuilt by the fifth generation Mugal emperor, namely, Shahjahan which isevidently proved.PRAYERIt is, therefore, MOSTRESPECTFULLY, prayed that this Hon’ble Court May graciously be pleasedto1. Issue a Writ,order, direction in the nature of mandamus by appointing a facts finding committeefor exposing the falsehood of the Arceaological department regarding thehistorical blunder committed by them in respect of their purported claim set-upin declaring Taj-Mahal, Red- fort Agra, Fatahpur –Sikiri and other ancientHindu buildings/ monuments as Muslim monuments and restrain them fromdisplaying the authorship of these buildings as constructed by Sahajahan or byany mughal Invaders as truth may be disclosed to the public/citizens andStudents in Subject of History regarding their true authorship prior to Mughalperiod in furtherance of theirfundamental rights conferred to the Citizens under Article 19 (1) (a), 25 and26 read with49 and 51-A(f) (h) of Constitution of India and Freedom OfInformation Act, 2002.2. Issue a writ,order, direction in the nature of mandamus declaring the provisions of TheAncient And Historical Monuments And Archaeological Sites And Remains(Declaration Of National Importance) Act, 1951 to the extend of declaring theancient and historical monuments and other and Archaeological Sites namely TajMahal. Fatehpur-sikiri, Agra Red Ford , Ethmadualla and other Monuments asbuilt by Mugal invaders on the basis of report submitted by Then GovernorGeneral, Lord Auckland, and young lieutenant Alexander Cunningham conceivedindigenous scheme of “Divide and Rule” and thereby misusing the archaeological studies, as ultravires toArticle 19 (1) (a), 25,26 49 And 51-A (f) (h)constitution of India and thisHon’ble Court may futher declare theprovision of Ancient and HistoricalMonuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains (Declaration of NationalImportance) Act, 1951 (71 of 1951), The Ancient Monuments And ArchaeologicalSites And Remains Act, 1958 of declaringthese ancient building/ monuments preserved with such false identity with outany scientific inquiry/ investigation as purported Muslim monuments /graveyards as unconstitutional and void.3. Issue a writ,order, direction in the nature of mandamus on the basis of the ResearchConducted by the petitioner No.
2 as published in the different books writtenby him as referred in earlier paragraphs namely 1. World Vedic Heritage, 2. TheTajmahal is a Temple Place, 3.Some Blunders of Indian Historical Research, 4.Flowers Howlers, 5. Learning Vedic Astrology, 6. Some Missing Chapters of WorldHistory, 7. Agra red Fort is a Hindu Building, 8.Great Britain was Hindu Land,9. The Taj Mahal is Tejomahalaya a Shiva Temple, 10.Who Says Akbar was Great,11. Vedic Guide to Health, Beauty, Longevity and Rejuvenation, 12. Islamic Havocin Indian History Published by-HINDI SAHITYA SADAN 2, B. D. Chambers, 10/54 D.B. Gupta Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005, the truth may be exposed throughScientific inventions and temperaments to the Citizen/ Students of history byconducting the research/ excavations of the remains of Hindu monuments by theCentral Government surroundings to all such Hindu Palace/ temple and otherancient archaeological building/ Monuments as the incidents like demolition ofdisputed structure at Ayodhya may not be repeated resulting in mass destructionof the public property shacking of public confidence under Rule Of Law in thesociety.4. Issue awrit, order, directions in the nature of mandamus directing the respondentauthorities after due Scientific investigation and facts finding inquiryreport, the respondents in particular the Archaeological Survey of India mayDeclare and Notify in terms of the true history, as the Taj Mahal was not builtby Shahajahan and thereby directing the Archaeological Survey of India toremove the notices displayed by them in the Taj Mahal premises creditingShahjahan as its creator and to futherdesist from writing / publishing / proclaiming / propagating and teaching aboutShahjahan being the author of Taj Mahal and stop and discontinue the free entryin Taj Mahal premises on Fridays in theweek.5. Issue a writ, order, direction inthe nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities in particularArchaeological Survey of India 1)-to open the locks of upper and lower portionsof the 4 storeyed building of Taj Mahal having numbers of rooms, 2)-to removeall bricked up walls build later blocking such rooms therein, 3)-to investigatescientifically and certify that which ofthose or both cenotaphs are fake,4)-to look for a subterrance storey below theriver bank ground level, 5)-to look into after removing the room-entrancedirectly beneath the basement cenotaph-chamber.6)
by removing the brick andlime barricade flocking the doorway, 7)-to look for important historicalevidence such as idols and inscriptions hidden inside there by the Shahjahan’s orders as truth may not make usrich but the same will make us free from superstitions and false propoganda ofsome of fundamentalists.6. Any other Writ , Order or Direction,Which this Hon’ble Court May deem fit in the circumstances of the case Dated-7th September,2004 YogeshKumar Saxena Advocate, High Court (Counsel for the Petitioner) Chamber No.139, High court, Allahabad