By Kritika Gangwar
On Monday, the Supreme Court refused to completely stay the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, but temporarily suspended certain controversial provisions. Among those put on hold are the clauses that authorize district collectors to determine if a property claimed as waqf is actually government owned, and the requirement that only a legal property owner who has been a practising Muslim for at least five years can create a waqf through a formal deed.
The court recommended that the government voluntarily limit non-Muslim members in the 11-person Central Waqf Council to three, to help keep the council focused on its religious and administrative duties. It also said the council shouldn’t have more than four non-Muslim members, and the State Waqf Boards should have no more than three. While the court allowed the appointment of a non-Muslim as CEO, it made it clear that, whenever possible, the CEO should be a Muslim.
Delivering the judgement, Chief Justice Gavai emphasised that legislation is generally presumed to be constitutional. However, he also noted that certain safeguards are essential, which justified the suspension of some provisions of the new law.
The top court in its order stated that “We have considered the prima facie challenge to each of the sections. We have found that no case was made out to stay the entire provisions of the statute. However, some sections need some protection”.
This follows an August 22 hearing where the Chief Justice-led bench refused to pause a government order requiring all waqf properties in India to be registered within six months on the UMEED portal. Issued on June 6 by the Ministry of Minority Affairs, the portal aims to create a transparent database of waqf properties to improve management and reduce disputes.
At that time, the Chief Justice made it clear that the court could not grant an interim stay because the judgment had already been reserved. “How can we pass an interim order when the judgment has been reserved in the issue? Sorry! You comply with whatever is required. We will consider everything in our order”. As said by the CJI.
The Centre and several state governments defended the waqf (Amendment) Act,2025, arguing that “waqf by user” isn’t a core islamic practice and often involves improper land claims, including over protected tribal lands. The Centre maintained that tribal land cannot be dedicated as waqf and emphasized the law’s constitutionality.
The Supreme Court, dealing with over 100 petitions, chose to hear five key cases and declined to put the entire law on hold. Defending the amendments, the Centre pointed to a dramatic rise in waqf land after 2013 and stressed the need for transparency. Tools like the UMEED portal, it says, will help clean up records and prevent misuse, while ensuring legitimate waqf properties are properly documented.