There is an often-repeated story that Lord William Bentinck, governor of India in the 1830s, planned to demolish the Taj and auction off the marble. In some versions of the tale, the demolition crew were ready to begin their work but were stopped only because Bentinck was unable to make the scheme financiaurzon was emphasising earlier neglect of the monument, and presenting himself as a saviour
P.N. Oak, President of The Institute for Rewriting Indian History, has repeatedly asserted that the Taj was a Hindu temple of the god Shiva, usurped and remodelled by Shah Jahan. The temple's name, he says, was originally "Tejomahalay"; this was corrupted over time to "Taj Mahal".Oak also claims that the tombs of Humayun, Akbar and Itmad-u-Dallah — as well as the Vatican in Rome, the Kaabah in Mecca, and Stonehenge, and "all historic buildings" in India — were also Hindu temples or palaces.
The Taj is only a typical illustration of how all historic buildings and townships from Kashmir to Cape Comorin though of Hindu origin have been ascribed to this or that Muslim ruler or courtier.
He further says that if Taj was not a Shiva temple, that it might then have been the palace of a Rajput king. In any case (he says), the Taj was Hindu in origin, stolen by Shah Jahan and adapted as a tomb — although Oak also claims that Mumtaz is not buried there.Oak further states that the numerous eyewitness accountar interest and made Oak a well-known media figure.He has sued to break open the cenotaphs, and to tear down brick walls in the lower plinth: In these "fake tombs" and "sealed apartments", Oak says Shivalingams or other temple items were hidden by Shah Jahan[2]. In 2000 India's Supreme Court dismissed Oak's petition to declare that a Hindu king built the Taj Mahal, and reprimanded him for bringing the action.According to Oak, the Indian government's refusal to allow him unfettered access amounts to a conspiracy against Hinduism.