Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Waqf Amendment Provisions

The Supreme Court of India will hear several petitions on April 16, 2025, questioning the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. The Parliament-approved and President-signatured legislation has ignited much controversy nationwide. The decision of this judicial review will have profound implications for the administration of waqf properties and the relationship between religious autonomy and governmental regulation.

Understanding Waqf and Its Importance

Waqf is a permanent association of property by a Muslim for religious, pious, or charitable causes. These properties, under the administration of Waqf Boards, find significant utility in providing assistance to mosques, educational establishments, and welfare activities among Muslim communities. The Waqf Act of 1995 once regulated these endowments, protecting them and ensuring they were properly administered.

Key Provisions of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025

The 2025 amendment brings with it a few notable alterations: 

The Act permits non-Muslims to be members of State Waqf Boards and the Central Waqf Council in a bid to increase inclusivity and varied points of view in waqf administration.

District Collectors are given greater power to decide on the ownership of controversial waqf properties, bypassing some authority from Waqf Boards to government representatives.

The Act does away with the recognition of waqf through long use (waqf by user) and demands formal documentation for all waqf properties.

Orders passed by Waqf Tribunals can now be appealed in the High Court within 90 days, adding another layer of judicial oversight.

For More Updates & Regular Notes Join Our Whats App Group (https://chat.whatsapp.com/DkucckgAEJbCtXwXr2yIt0) and Telegram Group ( https://t.me/legalmaestroeducators )

Support for the Amendment

Supporters believe that the amendment brings greater transparency and accountability to managing waqf properties. The government, through the inclusion of professionals with various backgrounds and stricter documentation, would seek to curtail abuse and ensure the intended use of waqf properties. Having non-Muslim members would be a step toward secularism and greater involvement of the community.

Criticism and Concerns

Opponents such as opposition parties and Muslim organizations are concerned that the amendment undermines religious freedoms as well as Muslim community autonomy. They contend that government officials would not have an adequate understanding of Islamic principles to effectively administer waqf properties. The abolition of waqf by user would also mean the loss of historically valuable properties that are not formally documented.

Constitutional Implications

The petitions in the Supreme Court question the amendment on various constitutional grounds:

It is argued by the critics that the amendment violates the rights under Article 25 of the Constitution, which provides for the freedom to administer religious affairs.

Involvement of non-Muslims in waqf governing bodies is viewed by a section as a violation of Article 14, which provides for equality before the law.

The transfer of power to government officials for deciding property ownership is problematic under Article 300A, which safeguards the right to property.