Waqf Amendment Act: Supreme Court To Hear Parties On Interim Relief On Tuesday

The Supreme Court today(May 15) posted the matters challenging the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 to Tuesday for hearing on interim relief. The Court also orally remarked that it will not permit any challenge to the Waqf Act, 1995 in a matter pertaining to the challenge to the 2025 Act."We will not consider any request or stay of the provisions of the 1995 Act. We are making it clear. Just because someone is trying to make a challenge to the 2025 Act, somebody just wants to jump in and challenge 1995 Act-that will not be permissible," the Court orally remarked.A bench of the Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai and AG Masih briefly heard Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal, Rajiv Dhavan Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Huzefa Ahmedi and CU Singh (for petitioners) and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta (Respondent-Union).On challenge to 2025 ActThe Counsels apprised the Court that on May 5, the bench comprising former CJI Sanjiv Khanna, Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice KV Viswanathan sent the matter to CJI Gavai's bench considering the retirement of former CJI Khanna on May 13. SG Mehta also submitted that he has filed a detailed reply on the three issues identified by the Court, which are: 1. The properties declared by Courts as Waqfs should not be de-notified as Waqfs, whether they are by waqf-by-user or waqf by deed, while the Court is hearing the matter. 2. The proviso of the Amendment Act, as per which a Waqf property will not be treated as a Waqf while the Collector is conducting an inquiry on whether the property is Government land, will not be given effect to. 3. All Members of the Waqf Boards and Central Waqf Council must be Muslims, except the ex-officio members.It was also submitted by Sibal that the Court is hearing the matter on interim relief on the three issues, and it will take appropriately 2 hours for the side of petitioner. SG Mehta also pleaded for some reasonable time. Sibal also informed that they will file a short note on provisions which are per se unconstitutional, which the Court asked them to circulate to the parties. Also, the Court asked SG Mehta to file a short note. Dr. G. Mohan Gopal, advocate for Sree Narayana Manava Dharmam Trust, objected to the five writ petitions being considered as lead petitions. He said: "All five writ petitions are from Muslim parties, it should not give a polarised impression..."This was countered by SG Mehta and Sibal, and both stated that this is the reason why the Court changed the nomenclature of the case to 'In Re Challenge to Waqf Amendment Act'.On challenge to 1995 Act One advocate Vishnu Shankar submitted that there are petitions challenging the 1995 Act as well, which require a hearing. He said: "We are also aggrieved by the present Waqf Amendment Act 2025...item 16 and 17. My grievance is that so far as the certain provisions of the Waqf Amendment Act, so far taxation is concerned-Section 8, waqf tribunal which is completely unconstitutional is still there. There are various other sections which is completely dacronian exist in the statute."On this, CJI Gavai questioned: "if they are existing since 1995 and are not challenged...you challenged it when?"Shankar responded: "It was challenged earlier, they asked us to go to the High Court. We filed around 140 petitions which are pending in different high courts and now we have filed the present writ petition which is a fresh matter challenging various provisions Mylord."CJI Gavai clarified: "How can we permit you to raise the challenge to the provisions of the 1995 Act in the 2025 Act?"Shankar responded that he is also seeking interim relief of the 2025 Act- Section 3(r)-waqf by user. The Court however, did not permit it. The matter was heard twice on April 16 and 17 in detail. On April 16, the submissions for the petitioners' side were led by Sibal, who raised various concerns about the 2025 Amendment Act, including on the omission of 'waqf by user' provision. It was argued by him that it is impossible to prove registration documents for centuries-old mosques, dargahs etc, which are mostly waqf by user.On the opposite side, the submissions were led by Solicitor General for India, Tushar Mehta. He informed the Court that the 'waqf by user' provision is prospective, something that was also assured in Parliament by Union Minister Kiren Rijiju. When former CJI Khanna enquired from SG if the waqf by users' properties will be affected or not, SG Mehta replied, "if registered, no, they will remain as waqf if they are registered."Also, concerns were raised also the inclusion of non-Muslim members in the Central Waqf Council and the State Waqf Boards. Former CJI Khanna asked SG Mehta if Muslims would be included in the Boards governing the Hindu religious endowments. At the end of the hearing, the Court proposed interim directions that no properties declared by the Courts as waqf should be denotified. It also proposed that all members of the Waqf Boards and Central Waqf Council must be Muslims, except the ex-officio members. The ...

Waqf Amendment Act: Supreme Court To Hear Parties On Interim Relief On Tuesday

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

Tags