New Delhi: The Allahabad high court on Monday (July 6) has sought responses from the Union government and the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) on a petition seeking a court-appointed inspection of the Taj Mahal in an ongoing civil lawsuit claiming that the UNESCO world heritage site was originally the Tejo Mahalaya, a Hindu temple dedicated to Lord Shiva.Hearing the matter, Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal issued notices to the centre and ASI, directing them to file their responses to the petition. The request for instituting an Advocate Commissioner to examine and photograph the monument has already been rejected twice by lower courts – an Agra trial court in 2019 and a revisional court in April 2026 – prompting the petitioners to move the high court.The plea has been filed on behalf of the deity Lord Sri Agreshwar Mahadev Nagnatheshwar Virajman Tejo Mahalaya Temple Palace and “next friend” Hari Shankar Jain, along with other devotees. According to The Hindu, Jain has also appeared in other communally contentious suits such as the Ram Janmabhoomi title case and the Krishna Janmabhoomi and Kashi Vishwanath-Gyanvapi mosque disputes.Claims behind the Taj Mahal inspection pleaThe underlying civil suit, pending in an Agra court since 2015, seeks a declaration that the Taj Mahal was a Shiva temple before it was converted into the mausoleum of Mumtaz Mahal during the reign of Mughal emperor Shah Jahan. Moreover, the petitions have sought permission to perform Hindu rituals and prayers inside the monument.As per The Hindu report, the petitioners have claimed that such acts of worship are protected under Article 25 of the constitution, guaranteeing the fundamental right to freedom of religion, and have alleged that the ASI has unlawfully permitted the Muslim community to offer namaz inside the premises.The latest plea argues that documenting the Taj Mahal’s architectural and structural features is necessary as such evidence cannot be effectively established through oral testimony alone. They further contend that as the monument is protected under the ASI, they cannot independently access or photograph various portions they claim bear evidence to the Taj Mahal’s ‘Hindu past,’ seeking the appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to do so.The petition specifically refers to minute and innocuous architectural features such as the dome’s finial, lotus motifs and a structure described as a “gaushala” in ASI records, while claiming that several parts of the monument remain inaccessible and require a court-monitored survey.A trial court, rejecting the application in 2019, had held that there was no justification for appointing an Advocate Commissioner. The ruling was affirmed by the revisional court this year, which observed that the petitioners has failed to produce revenue records identifying the property and that the land description in the suit did not match the documents relied upon by the defendants.In response to the lower courts’ decisions, the petitioners have argued that their applications were rejected on grounds unrelated to whether a local investigation was necessary to adjudicate the dispute, reported Bar and Bench. The plea also cited the Supreme Court’s 2019 Ayodhya judgment, which recognised the power of civil courts under Order XXVI Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure to appoint commissioners where a local investigation is required to clarify disputes questions of fact.Although the high court has not expressed any view on the merits of the claim, it had sought responses from the centre and ASI before deciding on whether a court-appointed inspection should be granted.