Supreme Court Stays Madras HC Order Halting TN Waqf Board's Functioning For Not Including 2 Non-Muslims & 2 Other Members

The Supreme Court on Thursday (February 19) stayed the order of the Madras High Court which halted the functioning of the Tamil Nadu State Waqf Board on the ground that the mandate of including two non-Muslim members, nominating a Bar Council member, and a person with professional experience was not followed.

A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul Pancholi passed the interim order while issuing notice on the Special Leave Petition filed by the TN Waqf Board against the Madras High Court's order.

The Supreme Court asked the Board to place before it a proposal for the constitution of the Board.

"Issue Notice. Impugned order by which the board has been made defunct is stayed. The state government to place a proposal for the constitution of the board," the bench observed in the order.

Senior Advocate P Wilson, for the Board, submitted that the eight out of eleven members were appointed and only three remained to be appointed. But this cannot be a ground to halt the functionning of the Board, he contneded.

Wilson further submitted since the Bar Council elections are going on, its nominee cannot be appointed.

Background

The Court was dealing with an SLP against Madras High Court order restraining the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board from exercising powers on the ground that prima facie it was not constituted in accordance with law.

The writ petition in the High Court was filed challenging the constitution of the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board under Section 14 of the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act, 1995.

The petitioner contended that the Board had not been constituted in accordance with the statutory mandate. He argued that only one person had been nominated under clause (d) of Section 14(1), though the provision requires two persons with professional experience in business management, social work, finance or revenue, agriculture and development activities.

He further submitted that no Member of the Bar Council of the State had been nominated under clause (f) of Section 14(1). He also pointed out that the second proviso to Section 14(1), which mandates that two of the total members appointed under sub-section (1), excluding ex officio members, shall be non-Muslim, had not been complied with.

The State submitted that the constitution of the Board was almost complete and that steps were being taken to fill the remaining posts. It was also argued that two members appointed under the earlier regime were continuing under the enabling provisions of the amended law and should not be counted for the purpose of working out the requirement of two non-Muslim members.

The High Court referred to Section 14 of the Act and to the interim order passed by the Supreme Court in In Re: The Wakf Amendment Act, 2025 (1) where the Supreme Court had directed that the number of non-Muslim members in a State Waqf Board should not exceed three.

On a prima facie reading of Section 14, the High Court held that the Board's constitution was not in accordance with law. It noted that only one nomination had been made under clause (d), no nomination had been made under clause (f), and the requirement of two non-Muslim members had not been fulfilled. The Court observed that while the State may, in future, appoint two non-Muslims while filling the remaining vacancies, the present constitution did not satisfy the statutory requirements.

Thus, the High Court restrained the Board from exercising any powers and functions under the Act. It granted time to the State to file a reply and listed the matter for January 19, 2026, while permitting the respondents to seek vacating of the stay.

The present SLP filed by the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board challenges this interim order.

Case no. – SLP(C) No. 6178/2026

Case Title – Tamil Nadu Waqf Board v. State of Tamil Nadu