Why is it in the news?
1. The Rajya Sabha passed the Waqf (Amendment Bill) on April 4th 2025. The bill was supported by 128 votes against 95 votes of the opposition parties. The Lok Sabha had earlier passed the bill with 288 votes against 232 votes. Once the President gives assent to the bill, it will become an Act.
2. The bill was introduced last year but on account of vociferous protests by opposition parties, it was referred to a joint parliamentary committee chaired by BJP MP Jagdambika Pal. The report was laid before both Houses on February 13th 2025.
3. Infuriated with the passage of Waqf Bill from both Houses of the Parliament, Congress MP Mohammad Javed, AIMIM MP Assaduddin Owaise, MLA Amanatullah Khan and NGO Association for protection of civil rights have filed separate petition before the Supreme Court, contending that the proposed legislation infringes upon constitutionally guaranteed right to religious freedom and property.
What is Waqf?
1. In Islamic law, Waqf refers to movable as well as movable property dedicated in the name of Allah for religious or charitable purposes. Proceeds from such properties are to be used for the upkeep of Mosques, Dargah, Khanquah, Madrasas, Maktabs and other educational institutions. The funds from Waqf property are to be utilised for supporting the poor, needy and destitute. These are also meant to provide scholarships to meritorious students to get higher education.
2. Once designated as Waqf, the property becomes inalienable. It means that the waqf property cannot be sold, inherited or gifted. The Waqf Act 1995 and amendments in 2013 created the legal framework for managing Waqf properties and established state Waqf boards.
Why did the Government bring the Waqf bill?
1. The Government of India introduced the Waqf (Amendment Bill) in Parliament to address long standing issues in the management and regulation of Waqf properties. The new bill is named the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development (UMEED) Act. The Government contended that the Waqf Act of 1995 had become outdated and riddled with inefficiencies. For example, the Sachar Committee Report, 2006 highlighted the mismanagement of Waqf property, alleging that the Waqf properties worth 6000 crore generated a mere 163 crore annually due to encroachments, illegal sales and poor oversight by Waqf Boards.
2. It aimed to enhance transparency, efficiency and inclusivity. The primary reason for bringing the waqf bill was to remove inefficiencies, corruption and legal ambiguities in the existing Waqf Act of 1995. The Government wanted reforms in the administration of the Waqf properties so that there should be better dispute resolution mechanisms, use of technology for property management and improved governance of Waqf Boards.
3. Government also aimed at ensuring better representation in the Waqf Boards by including diverse Muslim sects and women and introducing provisions like mandatory registration of Waqf properties on a centralised portal and auditing these properties and profits accrued from them. Thus, the government wanted to include marginalised Muslim communities in the administration of Waqf boards. The government also aimed at uplifting Muslim communities economically and socially, particularly widows and divorced women through better management of Waqf assets. Thus, the new Waqf bill aims at eliminating inefficiencies and enhancing accountability.
Judgements of the Supreme Court to push for reform in the Waqf Act 1995
The various judgments of the Supreme Court pushed the government to bring an amendment in the Waqf Act 1995.
In the case of Rajasthan Waqf Board vs Union of India (2016), the Supreme Court questioned the unchecked authority of Waqf tribunals under Waqf Act 1995, whereby the decisions of Waqf tribunals were deemed to be final with no appeal to Civil Courts/High Courts. Thus, it suggested that there is a need for higher judicial oversight on the decision of Waqf tribunals because the finality clause infringes upon constitutional rights under article 14 (Right to equality) and article 21 (Due process of law).
In the case of Karnataka Waqf Board vs Union of India (2018), the Supreme Court expressed dismay at the scale of encroachments on Waqf properties and failure of Waqf Boards to protect them. It also highlighted the mismanagement of the Waqf Board. The Court also held that because of the mismanagement of Waqf properties, benefits from these properties do not reach to intended beneficiaries.
In case of Waqf Board vs State of Maharashtra (2011), the Bombay High Court invalidated a Waqf Board claim over private land based on Waqf by user, ruling that long term use alone does not confer ownership without a valid deed. Thus, the court held that Waqf Boards must operate within the legal framework of property law, not religious custom alone.
In the case of Karnataka Waqf Board vs State of Karnataka (2016), The Karnataka High Court lambasted the Board for colluding with encroachers and failing to maintain records. It recommended systematic reforms of Waqf Boards, citing lack of transparency and mired in corruption. It supported centralised management.
In the case of UP Sunni Central Waqf Board vs State (2020), Allahabad High Court ruled that Waqf tribunals lacked jurisdiction over disputes involving non-waqf parties unless explicitly agreed, thereby advocating broader judicial access. Thus, the High Court pushed for integrating Waqf disputes into the mainstream judicial system to ensure fairness.
In the case of Tamil Nadu Waqf Board vs State (2022), Madras High Court rejected the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board’s claim over an entire village (including 1500 year old Hindu Temple) based on flimsy ground, calling it an abuse of power.
In the case of Delhi Waqf Board vs Union of India (2022), The court held that Delhi Waqf Board has failed to evict encroachers from 123 properties, including historical monuments. It ordered a detailed audit of the functioning of the Waqf Board and urged for its strict regulation.
Thus, the different judgements of the Supreme Court and High Courts criticised Waqf Boards for mismanagement, encroachments, corruption and opec functioning. Courts often have urgent legislative and administrative intervention in the functioning of Waqf Boards. Secondly, courts have curtailed boards autonomy where it conflicted with constitutional norms or public interests. They rejected unchecked powers of Waqf tribunals. The judgements stressed upon reforms in Waqf boards entailing audits, proper documentation and judicial oversight. However, courts cautioned against excessive state control over the functioning of Waqf Boards, thereby infringing upon the constitutional rights under article 26 of our constitution.
What are the important ingredients of Waqf bill?
1. The bill proposes sweeping reforms that significantly expands the government’s role in regulating Waqf properties and adjudicating disputes relating to them. It aims to modernise the governance of over 872000 properties, spanning 940000 acres of land valued at ₹1.2 trillion.
2. Under the new amendment, only those who have practised Islam for at least 5 years can dedicate properties as Waqf. Thus, it alters the original law whereby any person regardless of religion could dedicate property as Waqf. Critics point out that this provision is constitutionally suspect because once a person embraces Islam, he is entitled to all associated rights including the rights to religious dedication. This provision also violates the right to equality in article 14 of our constitution because it discriminates against recent converts by selectively barring them from endowing property for religious purposes.
3. The new Waqf bill also stipulates that all existing Waqf by user properties registered on or before the enactment of this law will retain their status unless they are disputed as Government land. It should be noted that Waqf by user is a doctrine in Islamic legal tradition that recognises properties as religious or charitable endowments based on uninterrupted communal use even in the absence of formal documentation.
4. The Waqf Bill provides for the survey of properties by an officer above the rank of collector where the Government ownership is disputed.
5. The bill provides for provision for the inclusion of non-Muslim in key Waqf institutions. It mandates that both the Central Waqf Council (22 members) and State Waqf Boards (11 members) must have at least two non-Muslim members. It also removes the requirement that the Chief Executive Officer of a Waqf Board should be a Muslim. It also mandates that at least two Muslim women and representatives from Shia, Sunni, Bohra, Aghakhanis and other backward Muslim classes like Pasmanda in both bodies to ensure inclusivity.
6. It also stipulates that there must be a State Government representative of the rank of Joint Secretary level to oversee the functioning of the Waqf Board. Critics argue that this provision is a direct infringement upon the fundamental rights of religious groups to administer their religious affairs under article 26, 29 and 30 our constitution.
7. The bill provides for a centralised registration system for Waqf properties in order to enhance financial oversight. Muttawalis (custodians of Waqfs) will be required to upload property details within six months from the enactment of the law and all future registration must be routed exclusively through this portal to the respective Waqf Boards.
8. The bill also seeks to repeal section 107 of the 1995 Act which had exempted Waqf properties from the applicability of the Limitation Act 1963. Critics argue that the removal of the Limitation Act would permit encroachers to claim ownership through adverse possession legitimising illegal occupation of Waqf land.
9. It ensures that a property can only be dedicated as Waqf after the owner settles inheritance claims, particularly safeguarding women’s rights under Islamic law. This prevents unilateral dedication that disenfranchises family members.
10. It imposes strict penalties for mismanagement or failure to register properties.
11. State Government’s must appoint survey commissioners to identify and notify Waqf properties. Waqf Boards are required to publish details online, thereby enhancing the public access to information.
12. District collectors or officers above their rank will survey and settle disputes over Waqf properties, thereby shifting power from tribunals to state administration.
13. It removes the finality of Waqf tribunal decisions, allowing appeals to High Courts within 90 days.
14. It empowers the Central Government to set detailed rules for Waqf management, registration, auditing and centralising oversight.
15. Waqf properties must undergo mutation, that is, ownership transfer under state revenue laws with proper records, ensuring legal clarity and reducing encroachments.
16. Disputes involving government owned land claimed as Waqf will be adjudicated by senior officers above the rank of district collector and not by Waqf tribunals to resolve Waqf conflicts.
Thus, the Waqf (Amendment Bill,2025) entails diverse representation, digital registration, audits and judicial oversight to enhance transparency, empowerment to marginalised Muslim Groups and Women and promote efficiency.
Impacts of Waqf Amendment Bill,2025
1. It would lead to better transparency and accountability to Waqf Boards.
2. It would enhance public trust in Waqf institutions.
3. The bill would be able to curb corruption and misuse of official position in the Waqf.
4. It will increase powers of Waqf Boards, thereby resolving disputes swiftly.
5. The bill would reduce the power of Waqf Board authority and would enhance government oversight.
6. The Bill would be seen as interference in religious autonomy by Muslim Community leaders.
7. Because of encroachments of Waqf properties especially in urban areas, the surveying and digitalisation may reignite dispute over land ownership and so there would arise ampteen numbers of legal battles between individuals or institutions occupying Waqf lands and Waqf Boards.
8. The Bill would bring more efficient management of Waqf properties , thereby enhancing their annual income. These incomes can be better utilised for the social, education and healthcare upliftment of Muslim communities.
9. The inclusion of non-Muslims and Government control in Waqf Board is seen by All India Muslim Personal Law Board as an erosion of religious autonomy guaranteed under article 26 our constitution, thereby fueling distrust and protest.
Conclusion
1. The Waqf Amendment Bill aims at bringing transparency in the administration of the Waqf Boards. By auditing Waqf properties several encroached lands would be freed, which may be used for development of infrastructure like schools, hospitals. It is imperative to discourage fringe groups from using the law to target mosques or Dargah. It is also necessary to promote interfaith dialogue to address grievances over specific properties.
