Making Taj Mahal a Waqf property: Azam Khan's proposal has few takers in UP

Samajwadi Party leader Azam Khan and controversies cannot stay apart. After virtually being sidelined in the party, Azam Khan was lying low for sometime. But the leader stirred quite a controversy on Friday by saying that the Taj Mahal, like any other burial ground, ought to be under the control and maintenance of the State Waqf Board. Not only this, he said that the Centre was “usurping” all the revenue that came from millions of tourists visiting the Agra monument. The proceeds, he said, should be given to the state government as this money “was sufficient to run two universities.” His controversial remark has drawn angry reaction as well as support from several sections. “The Muslim community has an emotional relationship with the Taj Mahal… if it is given to the Waqf Board it will remain a national monument. But earnings from this monument that go to the Centre should go towards welfare of Muslims.” It would be an injustice to the Muslim community if the Centre did not do this, he alleged. [caption id=“attachment_1816499” align=“alignleft” width=“380” class=" “]  Samajwadi leader Azam Khan. Screen grab[/caption] Incidentally, while addressing a meeting of Waqf board functionaries in Lucknow last week, Azam Khan had demanded that the Taj Mahal should be declared a Waqf property and he should be given its charge as he is the minister for Waqfs. His explanation is quite simplistic: Taj Mahal is a mausoleum of two Muslims Shahjahan and Mumtaz Mahal. “It does not matter whether they are royals or commoners. In religion all are equal. It is very odd that if the building constructed at a mausoleum is a cheap building, then it would be under Waqf Board and if it is an expensive building, generating revenue, then the Indian government will take the money.” Meanwhile, a prominent Sunni cleric Maulana Khalid Rasheed Firangimahli, the Imam of Lucknow Eidgah, has also said that there was a masjid within the premises of the Taj Mahal and it should be opened to devotees for offering namaaz. “We should be allowed to offer prayers at the Taj Mahal five times a day. We have handed over a memorandum to the Chief Minister and he has taken it positively,” the Maulana claimed. “It is yet another ploy to assert his position as a leader of the Muslim community even though the issue that he has raised may not concern the community in general,” says Syed Abbas, a local Shia leader. “His views do not represent the opinion of all Muslims and not even all Sunnis, and therefore should not be taken seriously,” says he. However, a professor of history in a Lucknow University College, Prof Rahul Shukla, says the endorsement of Azam Khan’s views by the Sunni cleric Maulana Khalid Rashid Firangimahali was an indication that a section of the community believed what Azam Khan has said was right. “Any big structure created by Muslim leaders in the past always included a masjid and there is a masjid even in Delhi’s Red Fort. This does not mean that the Red Fort should be opened for Muslims to offer namaz,” he asked. “The Taj without dispute belongs to the entire country and it is pointless to declare as belonging to any particular community,” says Athar Husain of the Centre for Objective Research and Development (CORD), adding that Azam’s statement is his attempt to remain relevant in identity politics in the state. He goes to the extent of saying that “Azam could well be creating hurdles in the path of Chief Minister Akhilesh Yadav who was vigorously pushing ahead with a development agenda.” A retired official belonging to the minority community said on condition of anonymity that it could well be an attempt to polarize the society especially since the MIM leader from Hyderabad AU Owaisi had declared his party would be setting up office in Uttar Pradesh. “It all appears to be a ploy to get Muslims’ support which is going to be crucial in the 2017 Assembly elections in the state,” he said. Describing Azam’s suggestion as “ridiculous,” BJP state spokesman Vijay Bahadur Pathak says the Taj was a national treasure and it was not proper to make it an issue of any particular community. He felt that Azam Khan was prone to speaking whatever came to his mind. This is not for the first time that Azam Khan has come up with this suggestion. Last year in January, Azam had told a small gathering of his supporters in Muzaffarnagar that “Had people decided to demolish the Taj Mahal instead of the Babri mosque, I would have led them.” His comment followed his expression of “sadness” at the riots after the demolition of the Babri shrine in Ayodhya way back in 1992. In the same vein he had condemned the late Moghul emperor Shah Jahan saying he “had no right to spend a fortune from the public money on his beloved.” His statement had come on a day when state’s Chief Minister Akhilesh Yadav was highlighting Taj Mahal as an attraction of the state at a meeting with some foreign delegates at a hotel in Agra.