Why in the News?

• The Supreme Court has questioned certain provisions of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Court’s Observation (Key Aspects Challenged, Interim Relief, Petitioners’ Concerns, Govt’s Stand, etc.)

Supreme Court’s Intervention in Waqf Law:

• In a landmark development, the Supreme Court of India has taken a critical view of the recently enacted Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, as it heard over 100 petitions questioning its constitutional validity.
• The Chief Justice of India, Sanjiv Khanna, along with Justices P.V. Sanjay Kumar and K.V. Viswanathan, raised concerns over three specific provisions that have potential to disrupt the long-standing waqf structure in India.

Key Aspects Challenged in the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025

• The apex court flagged three significant elements in the amended legislation:
  • Waqf-by-user Denotification:
    • The 2025 Act eliminates the legal recognition of waqf-by-user properties, those in use for religious or charitable purposes for centuries but not formally registered.
    • Petitioners argued that this change could instantly erase the legal existence of nearly 4 lakh out of 8 lakh waqf properties.
  • Non-Muslims in Waqf Bodies:
    • The Act allows non-Muslims to serve as ex-officio members of the Central Waqf Council and State Waqf Boards.
    • The court expressed concerns about this move, questioning whether religious institutions can be governed by individuals from outside the faith.
  • Collector’s Determination of Property Status:
    • The amended law permits District Collectors to determine if a property is waqf or government land.
    • The court warned that allowing a government officer to act as a judge in such matters could violate due process and raise issues of conflict of interest.

Judicial Observations and Proposed Interim Relief

• SC emphasized that the court normally does not stay legislative enactments unless the situation is exceptional.
• However, he observed that this case qualifies as an exception due to the wide-ranging implications of the amendments.
• In an effort to balance equities, the Chief Justice proposed a three-point interim order:
  • Properties already judicially declared as waqf, including waqf-by-user, should not be denotified for the time being.
  • While the government officer may investigate the nature of land ownership, the status of such properties should not be changed until judicial review is complete.
  • Appointment of non-Muslims to waqf bodies may continue, provided a majority of members remain Muslims.
• No formal order was passed as the govt sought more time for the government to present its arguments. The matter has been posted for further hearing.

Petitioners’ Concerns

• Petitioners argued that the new provisions violate Article 26 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right of religious denominations to manage their own affairs.
  • On Waqf-by-user:
    • Petitioners noted that the concept has been recognized in the Ayodhya judgment, and its sudden removal would result in mass dispossession of properties traditionally maintained by the Muslim community.
  • On Religious Autonomy:
    • Petitioners highlighted that forcing a Muslim donor to “prove” religious practice before dedicating a waqf is a parliamentary overreach into religious autonomy.
  • On Historical Continuity:
    • Justice Khanna pointed out the historical fact that many mosques and waqf properties predate British rule and land registration systems.
    • Therefore, requiring registered deeds from centuries ago is unreasonable.

Government’s Stand

• Solicitor General Tushar Mehta defended the law, stating that:
  • Registration of all waqfs, including waqf-by-user, has been mandatory since the 1923 Act.
  • Non-Muslim inclusion in waqf bodies is limited to two ex-officio positions out of 22.
  • The Collector’s power is procedural and temporary until judicial confirmation.
• However, the bench remained unconvinced on several points, especially concerning the impact on religious rights and property access.