New Delhi: While hearing petitions challenging the newly passed the Waqf Amendment Act on Wednesday, April 16, the Supreme Court asked the Central government if Muslims would be allowed to be part of Hindu religious trusts.
Solicitor general Tushar Mehta, who represented the Centre, claimed that there was a large section of Muslims who did not want to be governed by the Waqf Act.
A bench, led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna, along with Justices Sanjay Kumar and KV Viswanathan, asked Mehta, “Are you saying that from now on you will allow Muslims to be part of the Hindu endowment boards? Say it openly.”
“You cannot rewrite the past,” the bench said that when a public trust was declared to be a waqf 100 or 200 years ago, it couldn’t suddenly be taken over by the waqf board and declared otherwise.
“All members of the waqf boards and the Central waqf Council must be Muslims, except the ex-officio members,” the court observed.
“There are two aspects we want to ask both sides to address. Firstly, whether we should entertain or relegate it to the High Court? Secondly, point out in brief what you are really urging and wanting to argue? We are not saying there is any bar on SC in hearing, deciding pleas against the law,” it said.
The bench proposed to pass an order that defines properties registered as Waqf, including those claimed as Waqf because they have been used that way for a period, won’t be de-notified.
The apex court questioned Mehta on how “waqf by user” can be disallowed, as many would not have the requisite documents to get such waqfs registered.
“Waqf by user” refers to a practice where a property is recognised as a religious or charitable endowment (waqf) based on its long-term, uninterrupted use for such purposes, even if there isn’t a formal, written declaration of waqf by the owner.
“How will you register such waqfs by user? What documents will they have? It will lead to undoing something. Yes, there is some misuse. But there are genuine ones also. I have also gone through Privy Council judgments also. Waqf by the user is recognised. If you undo it, then it will be a problem. Legislature cannot declare a judgment, order or decree void. You can only take the basis,” the bench asked the solicitor general.
However, the Central government disagreed with the apex court and asked it to hold a proper hearing before making such a decision.
The bench, which did not issue a formal notice as of now, said it would resume hearing on the petitions at around 2 pm on April 17.
The top court also expressed concern over the violence that followed the law’s enactment and said it was disturbing when it was seized of the matter.
About 72 petitions, including those by AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi, All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), Congress MPs Imran Pratapgarhi and Mohammad Jawed, have been filed challenging the validity of the Act.
Waqf Act
The Centre recently notified the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, which got the assent of President Droupadi Murmu on April 5 after its passage from Parliament following heated debates in both houses.
The Bill was cleared by the Lok Sabha with 288 members supporting it and 232 against it. In the Rajya Sabha, it was passed with 128 members voting in favour and 95 opposing it.
The Centre, on April 8, filed a caveat in the apex court and sought a hearing before any order was passed in the matter. A caveat is filed by a party in the high courts and the apex court to ensure that no orders are passed without hearing it
(With PTI inputs)
On April 17, during the hearing of the Waqf law case, the Centre assured the Supreme Court that ‘waqf by user’ or ‘waqf by deed’ properties wouldn’t be denotified till the next hearing. Click here to read.
Follow on Twitter | Posted by Veena Nair | 
