Supreme Court to Review New Challenge Against Waqf Amendment Act, 2025

Supreme Court Considers New Plea on Waqf Act

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has agreed to examine a new petition questioning the constitutional legitimacy of various provisions within the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025.

A bench led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar acknowledged the request made by advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain to schedule a hearing for the newly filed plea.

“For cases where mentioning slips are submitted, we typically assign hearing dates within a week,” remarked the Chief Justice.

Currently, there are ten petitions, including one from AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi, set for discussion on April 16 before a three-judge panel that includes the Chief Justice and Justices Sanjay Kumar and KV Viswanathan.

The latest petition, brought forth by Hari Shankar Jain and Mani Munjal, targets the Union of India, the Ministry of Minority Affairs, and the Central Waqf Council.

This plea contests the constitutional validity of the Waqf Act, 1995, as modified by the Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025, arguing that these provisions infringe upon Articles 14, 15, 21, 25, 26, 27, and 300A of the Indian Constitution. It claims that they create an “imbalance and disharmony in Indian society” by providing “undue advantages” to the Muslim community.

The petition asserts that the Waqf Boards have acquired excessive authority through these legal changes, resulting in widespread occupation of both government and private lands throughout the nation.

“It is important to note that the general public across the country is affected by the unlawful actions of forcibly taking possession of individual and public properties, leading to over 120 petitions filed in various high courts that remain unresolved,” it stated.

Referring to a statement made by the Union home minister in 2025, the plea highlighted a “sharp increase” in Waqf-registered land, which rose from 1.8 million acres in 2013 to 3.9 million acres in 2025.

The statement also raised concerns about inconsistencies in Waqf land records, particularly regarding missing data on leased properties, as noted in the plea.

The petition seeks a declaration that non-Muslims should not be subjected to the provisions of the Waqf Act and requests the Centre to reclaim “Gram Panchayat and other public lands” recorded as Waqf.

Additionally, it calls for the acknowledgment of non-Muslims' rights to contest Waqf decisions in civil courts and the annulment of several provisions of the amended law on the grounds of unconstitutionality.

“It is pertinent to mention that following the partition in 1947, many Muslim residents migrated to Pakistan, while numerous Hindus relocated to India from the newly formed territory of Pakistan, leaving behind their valuable properties and belongings. Consequently, Parliament enacted the Administration of Evacuee Property Act 1950 to accommodate these migrants,” it explained.

The properties of Muslims who moved to Pakistan were transferred to the Government of India, according to the petition.

“The religious significance of properties held by Muslims who migrated to Pakistan has diminished, and they can no longer be classified as Waqf or religious properties. Therefore, evacuee properties should not be regarded as religious properties, and none of it should be allocated to Waqf boards,” it argued.

The plea also referenced Section 3(r) of the law, which includes Shamlat Deh (Gram Panchayat land) in the definition of Waqf land.

It further contests the validity of Sections 4, 6(1), and 7(1), claiming they lack sufficient safeguards for public involvement and the protection of non-Muslim interests.

Moreover, it challenges Section 8, which mandates state funding for Waqf land surveys, arguing that this constitutes a misuse of public resources.

Lastly, the petition disputes the legality of Section 28 of the Act, which permits the Waqf Board to issue binding directives to district magistrates.

The petition also questions the validity of Section 108 of the Waqf Act (prior to its repeal in 2025), which allowed for the transfer of Evacuee Properties—those abandoned during Partition—to Waqf Boards.

It asserts that this transfer was unconstitutional, infringing upon the property rights of displaced Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, and Buddhists, and calls for the restoration of such properties to the Government.