IN
THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD. Civil Misc.
Writ Petition No. 36818 of 2004
(Under Article 226 of constitution of
India) (District – Agra) 1. Institute of Rewriting Indian History
Through its Founder President, P. N. Oak. S/O Late Shri Nagesh Krishna Oak, R/O - Plot
No. 10, Goodwill Society, Aundh, Pune – 411007 2. P. N. Oak. S/O Late Shri Nagesh Krishna
Oak, R/O - Plot No. 10, Goodwill Society, Aundh, Pune - 4110071. Founder President,
Institute of Rewriting Indian
History, Aundh, Pune - 4110071 -----------Petitioner VERSUS Union
of India through Secretary, Human Resources and Development (HRD), Government
of India, New Delhi. Secretary, Tourism
and Archeological Department, Govt. of India, New Delhi Director
General, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, Janapath, New
Delhi.----------Respondents To,
Grounds
A.
Because truth will not make
us rich, but it will certainly make us free. The wrong historical data leads to
the horror, as we have seen during the period of demolition of the Babri Masjid.
There has been number of concomitant given by the respective community
representing to the follower of two prominent religions, but the loss that we
have suffered in the shape of hatred between the two section of the society,
cannot be compensated without revealing the truth. Unfortunately, the term
Hindu communalism is more exaggerated by the fanaticism under the garb of
secularism, while the Hindu community as a whole has always been receptive to
all the religion.
B.
Because Article 25 of the
constitution in India secures to every person, subject of course to public
order, health and morality and other provisions of Part III, including Article
17 freedom to entertain and exhibit outward acts as well as propagate and
disseminate such religious belief according to his judgement and conscience for
edification of others. The right of the State to impose such restrictions as
are desired or found necessary on grounds of public order, health, and morality
is inbuilt in Arts. 25 and 26 itself. Article 25(2)(b) ensures the right of the
State to make a law providing for social welfare and reforms besides throwing
open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to classes and
sections of Hindus and any such rights of State or of the communities or
classes of the society were also considered to need due regulation in the
process of harmonizing the various rights.
C.
Because every citizen of
India is fundamentally obligated to develop a scientific temper and humanism
.He is fundamentally duty bound to strive towards excellence, in all sphere of
individual and collective activity, so that the nation constantly rises to the
higher level of endeavor and achievements. Everyone, whether individually or
collectively is unquestionably under the supremacy of law. However it is true
that exaggerated devotion to the rule of benefit must not nurture fanciful
doubts or lingering suspicion and thereby destroy social defense, as the
curiosity cannot be the subject 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 do not contravene the statutory limits and may
prevail in the atmosphere with out any hindrance.
D.
Because public education is
essential for functioning of the process of popular government and to assist
the discovery of truth and strengthening the capacity of individual in
participating in decision making process .The decision making process include
the right to know also and pushing the protection beyond the primary level
betrays the bigwigs desire to keep the crippled more crippled forever. The
education of spritualism is the foundation for value based survival of human
being in a civilized society. The force and section behind civilized society
depend upon moral value; and the morality cannot be cultivated through the
falsehood of ideological barrier. Thus the children may not be required to read
such facts, which are having the foundation of falsehood.
E.
Because in Bijoe Emmanuel vs
State of Kerala (1986) 3 SCC 615, the
question raised 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 the national flag of our country despite being the student in the
school, where during morning assembly, the national anthem is sung by other
children. The circular issued by the Director of Public Instruction, Kerala
provided obligation of school children to sing the National Anthem. Thus these
children were expelled. The Hon’ble Supreme court while setting aside the
aforesaid order of expulsion of the children from the school was pleased to
examine, as to whether the children faithful to “Jehovah’s witnesses”, a
worldwide sect of Christianity may be compelled against tenets of their
religious faith duly recognized and well established all over the world which
was upheld by the highest court in United States of America, Australia and
Canada and find recognition in Encyclopedia Britannica. It was held that the
appellants truly and conscientiously believed that their religion does not
permit them to join any rituals except it them in their prayers to Jehovah,
their God. Though their religious beliefs may appear strange, the sincerity of
their beliefs is beyond question. They do not hold their beliefs idly and their
conduct is not the outcome of any perversity. The appellants have not asserted
the beliefs for the first time or out of any unpatriotic sentiments. Their
objection to sing is not just against the National Anthem of India. They have
refused to sing other National Anthems elsewhere. They are law abiding and
well-behaved children, who do stand respectfully and would continue to do so,
when National Anthem is sung. Their refusal, while so standing to join in the
singing of the National Anthem is neither disrespectful of it, nor inconsistent
with the Fundamental Duty under Article 51 A (a). Hence no action should have
been taken against them.
F.
Because the concept of sovereignty was
present from the ancient time but the sovereignty was conferred upon an
individual who is suppress the wicked and is recognized as great resources in
itself like the god of fire, air, sun, moon and religion. The religion in the
ancient time was considered as spiritualism and it was not dependent upon any
ritual ceremony, but it was considered s the knowledge in the darkness of
ignorance and injustice. 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
RamSharan Autyanuprasi’s case 1989 (Supp.) (1) SCC 251/AIR 1989 S.C 549 , that
men’s life is inclusive of his tradition , culture and heritage and protection
of that heritage in its full measure would certainly come within the encompass
of an expanded concept of Article 21 of the Constitution
H.
Because the mankind must be
satisfied with the reasonableness within reach and the decision-making process
may belong to the knowledge of the law. Thus the reasonableness and the
rationality, legality, as well as philosophically, provide colour to the
meaning of fundamental right .The concept of equality is not doctrinaire
approach. It is a binding threat, which runs through the entire constitutional
text thus the affirmative action may be constitutionally valid and the same
cannot ignore the constitutional morality, which embraces in-itself the
doctrine of inequality. It would be constitutionally immoral to perpetuate
inequality among majority .The constitution is required to kept young energetic
and alive. The attempt be endure to expand the ambit of fundamental right. It
is said that the dignity of the ocean lies not in its fury capable of causing
destruction, but in its vast extent and depth with enormous tolerance. Thus the
wider the power, the higher the need of caution and care while exercising the
power.
I.
Because the Student/children,
the future citizens under taking the education of Indian History on the
misconception/ pattern of Anglo Saxon teaching meant for division of Indian
society on the policy of “Divide and Rule”. There is a important question posed
as to whether we have actually gain our independence or we have to under take
another journey full of animosity, aggressism on account of terrorism and
fanatic ideology a prevalent throughout the World of a particular religion.
J.
Because this writ petition is moved in
the Public Interest, for a National Cause, to establish the truth there is no
private interest or any other oblique motive, or any other personal gain. The
petitioner institution, known as Institute for Re-writing Indian History, Thane,
having registration no.F-1128 (T) is a public trust. The founder president 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 of books namely 1.
World Vedic Heritage, 2. The Tajmahal is a Temple Place, 3.Some Blunders of
Indian Historical Research, 4. Flowers Howlers, 5. Learning Vedic Astrology, 6.
Some Missing Chapters of World History, 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 Havoc in Indian History.
K.
Because the petitioner No. 2 is the
founder President of an Institution, namely, “ Institute for Re-writing Indian
(and World) History “. The aim and objective of that institution, which is a
registered society having register no. F-1128 (T) as the public trust under the
provision of Bombay Public Trust Act. Inter alia, is to re-discover the Indian
history. The monumental places of historical importance in their real and true
perspective 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 an Invader Emperor in memory of his late wife but a Hindu Shiva Temple
which was converted into a love-memorial by a Invader Emperor.
M.
Because the freedom of speech and
expression is basic to indivisible from a democratic polity .It includes right
to impart and receive information. Restriction to the said right could be only
as provided in article 19(2). The old dictum let the people have the truth and
the freedom to discuss it and all will go well with the Government. It should
prevail. The true test for deciding the validity is whether it takes away or
abridges fundamental right of the citizens. If there were direct abridgement of
the fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression, the law would be
invalid.
N.
the ambit and scope of “Right to Know “ is
conferred fundamental right under Article 19 (1)(a),25 and26 read with Article
49 and 51-A(f) (h) of the Constitution of India; read with the provision of
Freedom of Information Act, 2002 .The right to get information in democracy is recognized
all throughout and it is a natural right flowing from the concept of democracy
itself. Freedom of expression may be necessarily included in the right of
information. There is no expression with out having an idea on the subject,
regarding which the expression of an individual may be given effect to change
the existing values of ideology, which are based on the notable extracts of
certain facts. An enlightening informed citizen would undoubtedly enhance
democratic values.
O.
Because the Governor General, Lord Auckland, and young lieutenant Alexander
Cunningham conceived indigenous scheme of misusing the archaeological
studies. This young Cunnigham, an army engineer had no training in the
archaeological department, he wrote a lengthy letter dated September 15, 1842
suggesting archeological exploration in India. This letter is reproduced on
page no 246 Volume 7 journal of Royal Asiatic Society, London, and 1843 A.D. It
discloses that the purpose of archeological exploration in India is neither the
study; nor preservation of historical monuments, but to use archeology as the
imperial tool to create mutual dissension and resentment between Buddhists,
Jains and other Hindu with Invaders by falsely crediting all monuments to the
authorship to alien invaders while few may be labeled as that of being
constructed by Buddhist or Jain, but not by Hindus.
P.
Because it has been disclosed during the High level Committee Meeting at Paris
during the convention of United Nation Education Science and Cultural Organisation
(UNESCO) that near Anoop Talab (Pond), there has been the ancient palatial
building and the ancient cultural activities remain in existance prior to the
period of invasion by the Mughal invaders. The historian have related them back
to the existence of all such palatial building during the period of Sikarwar,
Rajput, which find support by the research were conducted Prof. Ram Nathan
historian of Rajasthan University, Jaipur and also by Dr. Pratima Asthana, Ex
Vice Chancellor of Gorakhpur University.
Q.
Because one great tragedy of Indian history
has been that while Indians remained subdued and gagged under alien domination
for over a millenium foreigners, who wielded all power in India played great
havoc with Indian history merrily destroying or distorting it at their
sweetwill either out of sheer cunning and cussedness or through their colossal
ignorance and wanton barbarism.
R.
Because that life includes all the
meaning given to a man’s life including his tradition, culture and hertiage and
protection of that heritage in its full measure squarely comes within the
encompass of the extended concept of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
S.
Because that the Taj Mahal, is a mark of
history of hertiage and the glorious achievement of Indian Art and Archaeology,
and has to be named and recognised in its true perspective and origin as a
monument of world important must not be allowed to be the victim subject of an
“Historical fraud” as an infringement of Indian tradition and heritage if the
said monument is wrongly and falsely indentifing and reconized as a mausoleum
giving a go bye to its origin and actual creation as a Palace/Temple in
redemption of fact and restoration of history.
T.
Because the history of one’s heritage
has to be rewritten to give a true and correct account of the facts and
figures, achievements and failures, conquest end the defeat.as the Taj Mahal
was not built by the fifth generation Mugal emperor, namely, Shahjahan which is
evidently proved.
PRAYER
It is, therefore, MOST RESPECTFULLY, prayed that
this Hon’ble Court May graciously be pleased to
1.
Issue a Writ, order, direction in the
nature of mandamus by appointing a facts finding committee for exposing the
falsehood of the Arceaological department regarding the historical blunder
committed by them in respect of their purported claim set-up in declaring
Taj-Mahal, Red- fort Agra, Fatahpur –Sikiri and other ancient Hindu buildings/
monuments as Muslim monuments and restrain them from displaying the authorship
of these buildings as constructed by Sahajahan or by any mughal Invaders as
truth may be disclosed to the public/citizens and Students in Subject of
History regarding their true authorship prior to Mughal period in furtherance of their fundamental rights
conferred to the Citizens under Article 19 (1) (a), 25 and 26 read with49 and
51-A(f) (h) of Constitution of India and Freedom Of Information Act, 2002.
2.
Issue a writ, order, direction in
the nature of mandamus declaring the provisions of The Ancient And Historical
Monuments And Archaeological Sites And Remains (Declaration Of National
Importance) Act, 1951 to the extend of declaring the ancient and historical
monuments and other and Archaeological Sites namely Taj Mahal. Fatehpur-sikiri,
Agra Red Ford , Ethmadualla and other Monuments as built by Mugal invaders on
the basis of report submitted by Then Governor General, Lord Auckland, and
young lieutenant Alexander Cunningham conceived indigenous scheme of “Divide
and Rule” and thereby misusing the
archaeological studies, as ultravires to Article 19 (1) (a), 25,26 49 And 51-A
(f) (h)constitution of India and this Hon’ble Court may futher declare the provision of Ancient and Historical Monuments and
Archaeological Sites and Remains (Declaration of National Importance) Act, 1951
(71 of 1951), The Ancient Monuments And Archaeological Sites And Remains Act,
1958 of declaring these ancient
building/ monuments preserved with such false identity with out any 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 Research Conducted by the petitioner
No.-2 as published in the different books written by him as referred in earlier
paragraphs namely 1. World Vedic Heritage, 2. The Tajmahal is a Temple Place,
3.Some Blunders of Indian Historical Research, 4. Flowers Howlers, 5. Learning
Vedic Astrology, 6. Some Missing Chapters of World History, 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 Havoc in 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 through Scientific
inventions and temperaments to the Citizen/ Students of history by conducting
the research/ excavations of the remains of Hindu monuments by the Central
Government surroundings to all such Hindu Palace/ temple and other ancient
archaeological building/ Monuments as the incidents like demolition of disputed
structure at Ayodhya may not be repeated resulting in mass destruction of the
public property shacking of public confidence under Rule Of Law in the society.
4.
Issue a writ, order, directions in the
nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities after due Scientific
investigation and facts finding inquiry report, the respondents in particular
the Archaeological Survey of India may Declare and Notify in terms of the true
history, as the Taj Mahal was not built by Shahajahan and thereby directing the
Archaeological Survey of India to remove the notices displayed by them in the
Taj Mahal premises crediting Shahjahan as its creator and to futher desist from writing / publishing /
proclaiming / propagating and teaching about Shahjahan being the author of Taj
Mahal and stop and discontinue the free entry in Taj Mahal premises on
Fridays in the week.
5.
Issue a writ, order, direction in
the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities in particular
Archaeological Survey of India 1)-to open the locks of upper and lower portions
of the 4 storeyed building of Taj Mahal having numbers of rooms, 2)-to remove
all bricked up walls build later blocking such rooms therein, 3)-to investigate
scientifically and certify that which of
those or both cenotaphs are fake,4)-to look for a subterrance storey below the
river bank ground level, 5)-to look into after removing the room-entrance
directly beneath the basement cenotaph-chamber.6)- by removing the brick and
lime barricade flocking the doorway, 7)-to look for important historical
evidence such as idols and inscriptions hidden inside there by the Shahjahan’s orders as truth may not make us
rich but the same will make us free from superstitions and false propoganda of
some 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 Yogesh Kumar Saxena
Advocate, High Court
(Counsel for the Petitioner)
Chamber No.139, High court, Allahabad
No comments:
Post a Comment