| upsc relevance– GS II (Polity – Fundamental Rights, Minority Rights, Separation of Powers) and GS I (Society – Communal Relations, Secularism). |
Why in News?
On September 15, 2025, the Supreme Court gave an important order on the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. The Court did not stop the whole law from working but put a temporary hold (stay) on some disputed parts of it until a detailed constitutional check is done.
This decision, given by a Bench led by CJI B.R. Gavai and Justice A.G. Masih, is important because it directly affects:
- Minority rights
- Ownership and control of property
- How much power the State can have over religious institutions
Background: Waqf and the 2025 Amendments
- In Islamic law, Waqf means donating property permanently for religious or charitable purposes (like mosques, schools, or welfare).
- The Waqf Act, 1995 set rules for managing these properties. They are handled by Waqf Boards, under the supervision of the Central Waqf Council.
- In April 2025, the government introduced changes through the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. The government said the aim was to bring more transparency and accountability.
- But critics argue that these changes actually increase government control over Muslim religious institutions, raising concerns about minority rights.
The Challenge Before the Court
- Several leaders, including Asaduddin Owaisi (AIMIM), Mahua Moitra (TMC), Manoj Kumar Jha (RJD), and others, have challenged the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 in the Supreme Court.
- They argue that the law violates:
- Article 26: the right of religious groups to manage their own affairs.
- Article 30: the right of minorities to run their own institutions.
Main Objections:
- The law requires a person to be a practising Muslim for 5 years before creating a Waqf – this is seen as unfair and arbitrary.
- District Collectors get the power to decide property ownership – critics say this takes away the role of courts.
- Allowing non-Muslims on Waqf Boards – viewed as reducing the community’s control over its religious property.
Provisions Stayed by the Court
The Supreme Court found some parts of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 unfair and put them on hold:
1.Section 3C (Property disputes):
- District Collectors were given the power to decide if land was Waqf or government property.
- The Court stopped this, saying only courts or tribunals can decide land ownership.
2.Automatic divestment clause:
- Once an inquiry started, the property would automatically lose Waqf status.
- The Court suspended this to protect property rights.
3.Five-year practising Muslim rule:
- Law required a person to be a practising Muslim for 5 years before creating Waqf.
- The Court put this rule on hold until the government makes clear guidelines.
4.Non-Muslim members on Waqf Boards:
- The government allowed outsiders on Waqf Boards and the Central Council.
- The Court capped it: maximum 4 in Central Council, 3 in State Boards, to keep the minority character intact.
5.Tribal and heritage lands:
- Such lands cannot be declared Waqf.
- The court upheld this, citing constitutional and legal safeguards.
Provisions Upheld for Now
The Supreme Court allowed the following reforms in the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 to continue:
1. Abolition of “Waqf by User”
- Earlier: Continuous use of land could establish it as Waqf.
- The court upheld its abolition, citing frequent misuse to claim government land.
2. Mandatory Digital Registration of Waqf Properties
- All Waqf properties to be recorded on a central online portal.
- Ensures transparency, accountability, and better monitoring.
3. Application of the Limitation Act, 1963
- Waqf disputes are now subject to time limits for litigation.
- Prevents indefinite and prolonged legal battles.
4. Dedication Only from Self-Owned Property
- Only property legally owned by the donor can be dedicated as Waqf.
- Upheld as consistent with both Islamic law and general property law.
Broader Implications
1. For Minority Rights
- The Supreme Court’s order shows that executive interference in managing religious properties goes against the principle of separation of powers.
- But the five-year practising Muslim rule raises worries of the State policing religious identity, which could affect freedom of religion under Article 25.
2. For Property Law
- By stopping “waqf by user” and applying limitation periods, the Court has protected state land and private property rights from unchecked Waqf claims.
- The ruling tries to balance religious freedom with the rule of law in property matters.
3. For Governance
- The cap on non-Muslim members is a middle path between ensuring inclusivity and preserving minority autonomy.
- Digital registration of Waqf properties may reduce corruption and land encroachment, but will work only with strong implementation.
4. For Constitutional Jurisprudence
- The order shows the Court’s nuanced approach in handling the clash between reform and religious autonomy.
- The final judgment will likely define how far Articles 25–30 (freedom of religion & minority rights) apply in regulating religious endowments.
Way Forward
1. Legislative Clarity
- The government should frame clear and non-intrusive rules for the five-year practising Muslim requirement.
- These rules must avoid state interference in personal faith while ensuring fair implementation.
2. Strengthening Waqf Tribunals
- Instead of giving powers to District Collectors, the focus should be on capacity-building of Waqf tribunals.
- Well-trained and better-equipped tribunals can settle disputes quickly and fairly.
3. Community Engagement
- Reforms should be made through consultation with minority communities.
- This builds trust and cooperation between the State and the community.
4. Balancing Transparency with Autonomy
- Digital registration and accountability reforms are welcome.
- But they must not become a way to weaken minority rights or autonomy guaranteed under the Constitution.
Conclusion
The SC’s interim order on the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 reflects a careful attempt to balance reform with minority rights. While transparency and accountability are essential in managing religious endowments, they cannot come at the cost of constitutional freedoms of religious self-governance. The final ruling will be a landmark in defining how far the State can intervene in the administration of faith-based institutions in a secular democracy.
UPSC Mains Practice Question
GS Paper II – Polity & Governance
Q. “The Supreme Court’s interim ruling on the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 reflects the delicate balance between minority rights, property law, and state accountability.”Discuss the constitutional, legal, and governance challenges arising out of the amendments, and suggest measures to ensure transparency while safeguarding minority autonomy. (250 words)
UPSC Prelims Practice Question
Q. Consider the following provisions related to the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025:
- It abolished the practice of “waqf by user.”
- It mandated compulsory digital registration of all waqf properties.
- It empowered District Collectors to decide disputes on waqf property ownership.
- It applied the Limitation Act, 1963 to waqf-related disputes.
Which of the above provisions were upheld by the Supreme Court (as of September 2025)?
A. 1, 2 and 4 only
B. 2 and 3 only
C. 1, 3 and 4 only
D. 1, 2, 3 and 4
Correct Answer: A. 1, 2 and 4 only
(The Collector’s power under Provision 3 was stayed by the Court.)
SOURCE- THE HINDU
Found this helpful?
Bookmark for revision, Practice the mains question, and
Share with fellow aspirants! THANK YOU