Supreme Court Stays Heart-Wrenching and Illegal Provisions of Waqf Amendment Act, Upholds Non-Muslim Inclusion in Boards
By Aisha Rahman, Townhall Times Staff Writer
New Delhi, September 15, 2025
In a landmark ruling that has brought a sigh of relief to millions in the Muslim community, the Supreme Court of India today issued an interim order staying several contentious provisions of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, deeming them “heart-wrenching” and violative of fundamental rights. The bench, comprising Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice A.G. Masih, emphasized that while the entire Act cannot be stayed except in the “rarest of rare” cases, specific clauses that undermine religious autonomy, property rights, and the principle of separation of powers must be put on hold pending final adjudication.
Notably, the court refused to interfere with the provision allowing non-Muslim members in state Waqf boards and the Central Waqf Council, limiting their number to three and directing that efforts be made to appoint Muslims as CEOs “as far as possible.” This decision comes amid widespread protests and legal challenges from over 100 petitioners, who described the Act as a “creeping acquisition” of Muslim properties.
The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025—passed by Parliament in April after heated debates in both houses and receiving presidential assent on April 5—aimed to modernize Waqf administration through technology and curb alleged encroachments. However, critics, including prominent figures like AIMIM MP Asaduddin Owaisi, AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan, and organizations such as the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), argued that it discriminates against Muslims, erodes their religious freedoms under Articles 14, 15, 25, and 26 of the Constitution, and grants excessive powers to government officials. The Act’s notification on April 8 sparked nationwide demonstrations under slogans like “Waqf Bachao, Samvidhan Bachao,” with rallies in cities like Patna, Delhi, and Hyderabad highlighting fears of property denotification and loss of community control over Waqf assets, which span over 9 lakh properties worth billions.
Today’s pronouncement, reserved after three days of intense hearings in May, addressed three key issues raised in the petitions. The court stayed Section 3C(2), 3C(3), and 3C(4), which empowered district collectors or designated officers to unilaterally determine whether a disputed property is Waqf or government-owned. The bench observed that this provision blatantly violates the separation of powers by allowing executive authorities to adjudicate citizens’ rights, potentially leading to arbitrary denotification of long-standing Waqf lands, including those declared “waqf by user,” “waqf by deed,” or by court orders. “Empowering a Collector to decide on Waqf status infringes on judicial independence and could result in heart-wrenching losses for communities reliant on these endowments for mosques, schools, and orphanages,” CJI Gavai remarked, underscoring the provision’s illegality.
Another stayed clause is the requirement under the Act that a person must have practiced Islam for at least five years to dedicate property as Waqf. The court put this on hold until state governments frame clear rules for verifying religious practice, noting the vagueness and potential for discrimination. Petitioners had argued this condition is arbitrary, as it excludes recent converts and burdens individuals with proving their faith, thereby restricting the charitable intent central to Waqf creation. “This provision is not just illegal but heart-pinching, as it questions the sincerity of one’s devotion and hampers the spirit of Islamic philanthropy,” said Advocate M. Siddiqui, representing Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind. The stay ensures that Waqf dedications can proceed without this hurdle for now, protecting ongoing charitable activities.
The Supreme Court also refused to stay the power to denotify properties previously recognized as Waqf by courts or long usage, aligning it with the collector’s powers stay. This move addresses concerns over “waqf by user”—properties used for religious purposes over decades without formal registration—which the Act sought to abolish, potentially exposing thousands of sites to government takeover. The bench clarified that its interim directions are prima facie and do not prejudice the final hearing, where broader challenges like the abolition of waqf-by-user, application of the Limitation Act to Waqf claims, and bars on creating Waqfs in Scheduled Areas or near protected monuments will be examined.
While the non-Muslim inclusion in boards remains operational, the court directed sensitivity in appointments, stating that non-Muslims should not exceed three members and CEOs should preferably be from the Muslim community. This provision, defended by the Centre as promoting inclusivity and transparency, was not deemed unconstitutional at this stage, though petitioners vowed to challenge it vigorously. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Union, argued that the Act counters “rampant encroachment” on public lands and modernizes a 1995 framework amended in 2013, but the bench countered that reforms cannot come at the cost of religious rights.
The ruling has elicited mixed reactions. Owaisi hailed it as a “victory for constitutional secularism,” warning that the Act still poses risks to minority properties. Union Minister Kiren Rijiju, who renamed the law UMEED (Upliftment through Modernization and Empowerment of Endowment Dedications), welcomed the partial implementation, assuring no de-notification during pendency. BJP-ruled states like Uttar Pradesh and Gujarat, which intervened in support, emphasized the need for Waqf reforms to prevent misuse.
Legal experts view this as a balanced approach, preventing immediate harm while allowing the law’s purported benefits—like mandatory registration, which the court upheld (noting it existed pre-2013)—to take effect. However, with final hearings slated soon, the battle over the Act’s fate continues. For the Muslim community, today’s stay offers temporary solace against what they call an “illegal assault” on their heritage, but the fight for full protection of Waqf rights persists.
As India grapples with balancing reform and rights, this decision reinforces the judiciary’s role as a bulwark against overreach. Townhall Times will monitor developments closely.
-
#SupremeCourtIndia
-
#WaqfAmendmentAct
-
#WaqfAct2025
-
#IndianLaw
-
#LegalReformIndia
-
#ConstitutionalRights
-
#ReligiousFreedom
-
#MinorityRights
Community & Protest Related:
-
#WaqfBachao
-
#SamvidhanBachao
-
#MuslimCommunity
-
#WaqfProperties
-
#IslamicPhilanthropy
-
#CommunityRights
Broader Issues & Commentary:
-
#JudicialReview
-
#ReligiousAutonomy
-
#SeparationOfPowers
-
#HumanRightsIndia
-
#EndowmentLaw
-
#LandRightsIndia
-
#LegalNewsIndia
-
#TownhallTimes
Leave a Reply