The Supreme Court has halted important elements of the Waqf (Amendment) Act that caused widespread demonstrations because it believes that some of them may result in the “arbitrary” use of authority. Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and Justice AG Masih’s bench stated that “some sections need some protection” but that no argument was shown to stop the entire Act.
“The Collector cannot be allowed to adjudicate the rights of personal citizens, and this will violate the separation of powers,” the court said, citing the new law’s wide grant of district collector jurisdiction. Until the tribunal has made a ruling, no third-party rights can be established against any party. The provision giving the Collector these authorities shall remain in effect.
The new law has made the District Collector the final arbiter in cases involving Waqf land ownership. Muslim groups opposed to the Act raised this section, arguing that it would lead to further unlawful claims on Waqf assets.
Additionally, the court stated that a Waqf board should have no more than three non-Muslim members, and the Central Waqf Council should have no more than four.
According to Chief Justice Gavai, the law’s provision stating that only those who have practiced Islam for at least five years are eligible to register a Waqf has to be put on hold. “Without any mechanism, it will lead to an exercise of arbitrary power,” he stated.
The court stated that it must only intervene in the “rarest of rare cases” and that its “presumption is always in favor of the constitutionality of a statute.”
Massive protests were held nationwide after revisions to the 1995 Waqf legislation were approved by Parliament and signed into law by the president in April. Muslim organizations accused the amendments of being illegal and part of a plot to seize Waqf land. The government refuted these claims, claiming that several Waqf sites are involved in significant land disputes and have been identified for encroachment. According to the Center, these problems were intended to be resolved by the new law.
One important Muslim organization, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, is one of the petitioners who have contested the Waqf Amendment Act. Syed Qasim Rasool Ilyas, one of its members, stated that the top court had “to a large extent” accepted the board’s arguments. “We have had our point on ‘Waqf by User’ acknowledged. In addition, our argument about protected monuments—that no third party claims will be made—has been accepted. Along with the removal of the five-year amendment, he told news agency ANI, “I want to say that, for the most part, many of our points have been accepted, and we think that there is satisfaction to a large extent.”
FAQ: Supreme Court Stays Key Provisions of Waqf (Amendment) Act
Q1: What did the Supreme Court decide about the Waqf (Amendment) Act?
A1: The Supreme Court has stayed certain provisions of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, citing concerns that they could lead to “arbitrary” use of authority. The court, however, did not strike down the entire Act.
Q2: Which provisions have been stayed by the Supreme Court?
A2: Key provisions stayed include:
The section granting District Collectors the authority to adjudicate rights of individuals over Waqf properties.
The rule that only individuals who have practiced Islam for at least five years can register a Waqf.
Restrictions on the composition of Waqf boards and the Central Waqf Council in certain cases, such as limiting non-Muslim members.
Q3: Why were these provisions challenged?
A3: Muslim organizations argued that the provisions could lead to unlawful claims on Waqf properties, misuse of powers by District Collectors, and violations of the separation of powers. Protests were held nationwide after the amendments were passed in April 2025.
Q4: What is the court’s reasoning for staying these provisions?
A4: The Supreme Court said that allowing the Collector to decide individual rights would violate the separation of powers. Also, the five-year requirement for Waqf registration lacked a proper mechanism and could lead to arbitrary decisions.
Q5: What happens to Waqf land disputes during this stay?
A5: Until the tribunal rules on a case, no third-party rights can be established against any party. This ensures protection of Waqf properties during legal proceedings.
Q6: Who filed the petitions against the Waqf (Amendment) Act?
A6: One of the main petitioners is the All India Muslim Personal Law Board. They contested the amendments citing potential violations and the arbitrary nature of certain provisions.
Q7: What has been the reaction from Muslim organizations?
A7: Syed Qasim Rasool Ilyas of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board stated that the court “to a large extent” accepted their arguments, including protections for Waqf monuments and the removal of the five-year amendment.
Q8: Did the government respond to the protests?
A8: The government defended the amendments, stating they aim to resolve disputes over Waqf properties, prevent encroachment, and secure sites of significant value.
Q9: What is the Supreme Court’s general stance on such laws?
A9: The court stated it intervenes only in the “rarest of rare cases” and generally presumes the constitutionality of a statute unless proven otherwise.
Q10: What is the government’s position?
A10: The government asserts that the amendments are necessary to resolve encroachment disputes, protect significant Waqf sites, and improve management across India.
Q11: Does this mean the entire Act is nullified?
A11: No. Only select provisions are stayed. The rest of the Act remains in force while the courts examine its implementation and impact.
Q12: What is the next step legally?
A12: Tribunals and courts will continue adjudicating Waqf property disputes. The stay ensures that no arbitrary claims or actions occur until the legal process is completed.
Q13: How does this affect ordinary Muslims managing Waqf properties?
A13: The stay protects their rights, ensuring they are not subject to arbitrary actions by District Collectors or other authorities until formal legal adjudication.
Q14: What is the broader impact of this Supreme Court order?
A14: The order reassures Waqf boards and property owners that their rights are protected. It also reinforces the importance of legal safeguards in laws affecting religious and community properties.
Q15: What role does the District Collector have under the Waqf Amendment Act?
A15: The Act gave District Collectors the power to adjudicate ownership and rights of Waqf properties. The Supreme Court stayed this provision, noting that allowing the Collector to decide individual property disputes could violate the separation of powers and lead to arbitrary authority.
Q16: What is the “five-year practice of Islam” clause?
A16: The amendment stated that only individuals who have practiced Islam for at least five years are eligible to register a Waqf. The Supreme Court put this clause on hold because, without proper mechanisms, it could be enforced arbitrarily.
Q17: How does the stay affect the Central Waqf Council?
A17: The Supreme Court confirmed that the number of non-Muslim members in the Central Waqf Council should not exceed four, preserving the religious balance and management intent of the Council.
Q18: Are Waqf board decisions impacted by this stay?
A18: Yes. Until the stay is lifted and tribunals make rulings, Waqf boards cannot act on matters that could violate third-party rights or execute arbitrary authority over properties.
Q19: Why was there public outrage over the amendments?
A19: Protests erupted nationwide as Muslim groups feared the amendments could allow unlawful seizure of Waqf lands, reduce community control over properties, and concentrate power in government authorities like District Collectors.
Q20: What arguments did the petitioners present?
A20: Petitioners argued that the amendments could:
Lead to unlawful claims on Waqf properties.
Violate constitutional principles like separation of powers.
Allow arbitrary actions by authorities without proper oversight.
Impose unjust eligibility requirements for Waqf registration.
Q21: What is the government’s counter-argument?
A21: The government stated the amendments are necessary to:
Address encroachment issues.
Protect valuable Waqf properties.
Streamline administration and ensure better governance of Waqf boards.
Q22: What is “Waqf by User” mentioned by the Supreme Court?
A22: “Waqf by User” refers to Waqf properties created through long-term use or dedication by individuals. The Supreme Court acknowledged protections for these properties, ensuring third parties cannot claim them until adjudicated.
Q23: Will this order affect ongoing disputes over Waqf land?
A23: Yes. Any ongoing disputes must follow tribunal procedures without interference from third parties or arbitrary administrative action until the Supreme Court’s review is complete.
Q24: Does the stay have nationwide implications?
A24: Yes. Waqf boards and property owners across India are temporarily shielded from provisions that could grant excessive powers to District Collectors or impose arbitrary registration requirements.
Q25: What is the significance of the Supreme Court emphasizing “rarest of rare cases”?
A25: The Court clarified that it intervenes only in extreme cases where constitutional violations or arbitrary power are evident. The presumption is generally in favor of the law’s validity unless such risks exist.
Q26: How long will the stay remain in effect?
A26: The stay will continue until the Supreme Court or relevant tribunals examine the legality and constitutionality of the challenged provisions.
Q27: How has the All India Muslim Personal Law Board reacted?
A27: They expressed satisfaction, noting that the Supreme Court accepted many of their key arguments, including protections for Waqf by User, restrictions on third-party claims, and suspension of the five-year registration rule.
Q28: What happens next for Waqf property owners and boards?
A28: Boards and property owners should continue managing Waqf properties within existing legal frameworks and avoid actions that could conflict with tribunal or court directions. The stay ensures that no rights are arbitrarily violated until legal review is completed.
Q29: What sections of the Waqf Amendment Act have been stayed?
A29: The Supreme Court stayed provisions that grant District Collectors the power to adjudicate Waqf property disputes, the clause requiring a five-year practice of Islam for Waqf registration, and limits on non-Muslim representation on Waqf boards beyond specified numbers.
Q30: Why did the Supreme Court intervene?
A30: The Court intervened because these provisions could lead to “arbitrary” use of authority, violate the separation of powers, and infringe on constitutional rights. The Court emphasized that intervention should only occur in cases of constitutional concern.
Q31: How does the stay impact District Collectors?
A31: District Collectors cannot make final decisions regarding individual Waqf property ownership until the relevant tribunals adjudicate. Their role as arbitrators has been temporarily suspended to prevent misuse of authority.
Q32: How are Waqf boards affected?
A32: Waqf boards cannot act beyond their statutory limits. Boards must ensure third-party rights are not violated and cannot act on issues restricted by the Supreme Court stay.
Q33: What is the significance of limiting non-Muslim members?
A33: The Supreme Court affirmed that Waqf boards should have no more than three non-Muslim members, and the Central Waqf Council should have no more than four. This maintains religious balance in governance while protecting minority representation.
Q34: What happens to Waqf registration rules under the stay?
A34: The provision requiring applicants to have practiced Islam for five years is suspended. Registration procedures must follow standard legal frameworks until further orders.
Q35: How will this affect ongoing Waqf property disputes?
A35: All ongoing disputes are to be handled through tribunals. No new claims or third-party interventions can be made under the suspended provisions, ensuring property rights are not arbitrarily challenged.
Q36: How did protests influence judicial scrutiny?
A36: Nationwide protests highlighted concerns about potential misuse of the Act. Muslim organizations emphasized that the amendments could facilitate unlawful seizure of Waqf lands, prompting the Supreme Court to review specific sections carefully.
Q37: What is “Waqf by User” and why is it protected?
A37: Waqf by User refers to properties dedicated through long-term use. The Court recognized these protections, ensuring that such Waqf properties cannot be claimed by third parties until properly adjudicated.
Q38: Are there any immediate actions Waqf boards must take?
A38: Waqf boards should maintain the status quo, avoid arbitrary enforcement of disputed provisions, and comply with tribunal decisions. Boards must also ensure transparency in property management while the stay is in effect.
Q39: What does this mean for government enforcement?
A39: Government authorities cannot exercise the stayed powers until the Supreme Court lifts the stay or the tribunal decides. Enforcement of these provisions would otherwise be considered unconstitutional.
Q40: What is the expected timeline for resolution?
A40: The Supreme Court will review the constitutional validity of the Act’s challenged sections. Until then, the stay remains in effect. The timeline depends on the Court’s hearings and tribunal judgments.
Q41: How did Muslim organizations respond to the order?
A41: Groups like the All India Muslim Personal Law Board expressed satisfaction, stating that the Court accepted many of their key points, including protection of Waqf by User, restrictions on third-party claims, and suspension of the five-year registration clause.
Q42: What is the broader impact on Waqf property administration?
A42: The order reinforces that Waqf properties must be managed within constitutional limits. Boards and authorities are encouraged to follow due process and legal safeguards while preventing encroachments, but without overstepping their authority.
Q43: Can new amendments still be proposed?
A43: Yes. Parliament can propose new amendments, but they must respect constitutional safeguards, separation of powers, and avoid arbitrary administrative powers over Waqf properties.
Q44: Does the stay affect all sections of the Waqf Amendment Act?
A44: No, the stay only affects specific provisions that could lead to arbitrary powers, such as the District Collector’s adjudication powers, the five-year Islam practice requirement for registration, and certain composition rules for Waqf boards. The rest of the Act remains in force.
Q45: How does this decision protect Waqf property owners?
A45: By suspending the powers of District Collectors and third-party claims, the Court ensures that personal rights of Waqf property owners cannot be arbitrarily overridden until tribunals or courts adjudicate disputes.
Q46: Can the government still manage Waqf properties during the stay?
A46: Yes, but government authorities must operate within the limits of the law and cannot enforce provisions that have been stayed. Administrative actions should comply with existing Waqf rules and tribunal oversight.
Q47: What is the rationale behind limiting non-Muslim members on Waqf boards?
A47: The Supreme Court wants to maintain religious representation proportionality while avoiding domination of Waqf boards by non-Muslim members. This ensures decisions remain primarily aligned with the community that maintains the Waqf.
Q48: Will the stay impact ongoing Waqf land disputes in courts?
A48: No, ongoing disputes will continue in tribunals and courts. However, no new claims or third-party interventions can be enforced under the stayed provisions until the Supreme Court provides further guidance.
Q49: Are private citizens or Waqf organizations affected by the stay?
A49: Yes. Private citizens cannot have their rights adjudicated by District Collectors under the stayed provisions. Waqf organizations must follow tribunal decisions and maintain property management without overstepping legal bounds.
Q50: How did the Supreme Court view protests against the Act?
A50: The Court acknowledged the concerns raised by protests and legal challenges, which emphasized the risk of misuse of power and potential infringement on property rights. This informed the decision to stay certain provisions.
Q51: Can the five-year Islam practice requirement be challenged permanently?
A51: The Supreme Court has temporarily suspended it, stating that without a clear mechanism, it could lead to arbitrary decisions. Its long-term fate will be determined in subsequent hearings.
Q52: Does this ruling prevent the government from amending the Act again?
A52: No. Parliament can propose amendments, but any new provision must comply with constitutional safeguards, avoid arbitrary authority, and respect the separation of powers.
Q53: What are the next steps for Waqf boards?
A53: Waqf boards should maintain the status quo, avoid invoking stayed powers, continue regular administrative work, and comply with tribunal or court decisions. Transparency and adherence to legal guidelines are key.
Q54: What was the reaction of Muslim organizations to the Court’s decision?
A54: Organizations such as the All India Muslim Personal Law Board welcomed the ruling, stating it accepted many of their core arguments, including protection for “Waqf by User,” safeguards against third-party claims, and suspension of the controversial five-year rule.
Q55: Does the stay resolve all disputes over Waqf properties?
A55: No, the stay only prevents misuse of authority under specific provisions. Ongoing and future disputes will still require resolution through tribunals or courts.
Q56: How does this decision impact the Central Waqf Council?
A56: The Council must now adhere to the restriction of having no more than four non-Muslim members and cannot act beyond the legal limits defined by the Court while managing Waqf properties.
Q57: How does this affect Waqf property encroachment cases?
A57: While the stay restricts arbitrary powers, property encroachment issues can still be addressed through proper legal channels, tribunals, and courts without violating constitutional safeguards.
Q58: Can third parties still claim Waqf properties?
A58: No, the Supreme Court’s order prevents third-party claims on Waqf assets until the appropriate tribunal or court adjudicates the matter.
Q59: Will this ruling influence future Waqf legislation?
A59: Yes, the ruling sets a precedent that future Waqf laws must respect constitutional limits, ensure proper checks and balances, and avoid granting arbitrary powers to administrative authorities.
Add Business Connect magazine to your Google News feed
Must Read:-
- Update Mobile Number in Ration Card Online – Step-by-Step Guide 2025
- Benefits and Status of the Different Categories of Ration Cards
- Ration Card e-KYC: Status Check & Online Verification
- Ration Card Apply in Maharashtra: Step-by-Step Guide 2025
- E-Shram Card Registration in Mumbai – Benefits & Steps (2025 Guide)
- AAY Ration Card Benefits: Everything You Need to Know in 2025
- Delhi Ayushman Card Registration 2025
- Big News for Delhi Residents: Ayushman Bharat Scheme Launches Today, Priority for AAY Ration Card Holders
- How to Add a Name to Your Ration Card: A Step-by-Step Guide
- Uidai aadhaar: How to Download Aadhar Card via WhatsApp – Complete Step-by-Step Guide
