NewsDeskReport
WAQF Amendment Act: The Central Government, while justifying the Waqf Amendment Act in the Supreme Court, said that for the last 100 years, Waqf by users are recognized only on registration basis, not orally. Therefore, the amendment corresponds to continuous practice. The central government said that intentionally identifying the government land as a vaqf property is to correct the revenue records and the government land cannot be considered as the land of any religious community.
Opposed partial or complete restriction
Justifying the Waqf Amendment Act, the Central Government said that during its pending in the court, he opposed partial or complete ban. The Center said that it is a situation established in the law that the Constitutional Courts will not directly or indirectly stop any statutory provision and will take a final decision on the matter. There is a perception of constitutionality, which applies to the laws made by Parliament. The interim stop by the court is against the principle of balance.
No personal matters in petitions
The Central Government argued in the Supreme Court that this law has been made on the recommendations of the Joint Parliamentary Committee, which is a detailed report prepared after a comprehensive debate in both houses of Parliament. Whereas the Supreme Court undoubtedly has the power to investigate the constitutionality of the law. At the interim level, providing prohibitory orders against the operation of any provision of law, directly or indirectly, will violate this notion of 3 (b) (c) Constitutionality, which is one of the aspects of the delicate balance of power between different branches of the state. It is worth emphasizing that the petitions being heard by the Supreme Court have not complained of injustice in any individual case, which needs to be preserved by interim order in a specific case. And no fact or specific details have been given.
Waqf’s increased assets, central government claims
- This law is a reflection of the will of elected representatives, as it has passed in Parliament
- Detailed discussion for this
- It was surprised to know that after the amendment brought in 2013, the Auqaf sector has increased by 116%.
- The misuse of Waqf provisions has been reported to encroach on private properties and government properties
- It is really shocking to know that after the amendment brought in the year 2013, the Auqaf sector has increased by 116%.
- Prior to the Mughal period, in the freedom era and freedom era, the total number of total wakfas in India was 18,29,163.896 acres.
- The shocking thing is that after 2013, the Waqf land has increased by 20,92,072.536 acres.
- It has been a constant experience that each Waqf and each Waqf board do not upload the details to the public domain for the purpose of avoiding transparency and avoid regulatory inspections.
- The maximum of 22 members of the Waqf Parishad and the Oukaf Board will be two non-Muslims
- This step represents inclusion
- It does not interfere with Waqf Administration
- This law does not violate the fundamental rights of the Constitution
- This amendment is constitutionally valid
- Waqf is not a religious institution of Muslims but a legal body
- According to the Waqf Amendment Act, the work of Mutavalli is secular and not religious
- These law reflects the sentiments of elected public representatives
- He has passed it by majority
- Before passing this bill, 36 meetings of Joint Parliamentary Committee were held and more than 97 lakh stakeholders gave suggestions and memorandum.
- The committee visited ten big cities of the country and go to the public and know their thoughts
- There are many examples that will show how ‘Waqf by User’ and ‘Demanding any land by Waqf Board as Waqf’ have proved to be a safe haven of encroachment of government properties and private properties.
- The law passed by Parliament is considered constitutionally valid
- Especially when it is created after the recommendations of the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) and a comprehensive debate in Parliament
- The Supreme Court was requested not to stop any provision yet
- The amendment does not interfere with any person’s religious right to create a vaqf
- Law has been changed to ensure only management and transparency
The Central Government filed its initial affidavit in the Supreme Court and demanded dismissal of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. The Center protested against the ban on any provision of the Act, saying that the law has an established situation that the Constitutional Courts will not directly or indirectly ban any statutory provision and will take a final decision on the matter. The Center said that no person from the Muslim community was denied to make Waqf by depriving the Waqf-by-UGer of statutory protection. The affidavit further states that “deliberately, purposeful and deliberately misleading story” has been created in a very naughty manner, which makes the perception that the Waqfs (including ‘Waqf-by-User) do not have documents to support their claims. This is not only untrue and false, but this court is being deliberately misled. Under the provision of Section 3 (1) (R), the amendment to be preserved as ‘Waqf-Bai-Uzer’ has not been emphasized on any trust, deed or any documentary evidence. The only mandatory requirement for being preserved under the provision is that such ‘Waqf-Bai-User’ must be registered by 8 April 2025. Because registration has always been mandatory according to the law controlling the waqfs for the last 100 years. The Center says that those who deliberately avoid registering ‘Waqf-Bay-User’ cannot claim the benefits of the provision.
Central government affidavit on Waqf
- According to the statement given by the Solicitor General in the Supreme Court, only two non-Muslim members will be allowed in Waqf bodies
- The Center argued against any interim adjournment that the legislature had enacted a law. It is considered constitutional. It would be unfair to change the system established by that law
- This process will not be permitted, whether in the interim stage or in the final stage. Any such order sought by the petitioners will be similar to the postponement of the Amendment Act passed by Parliament at the interim level, which is an inappropriate practice
- There is no basis for interim relief and prayers of the petitioners should be rejected in this regard
- By removing the major legal issues, the Amendment Act confirms that the identification, classification and regulation of Waqf property should be subject to legal standards and judicial monitoring
- The legislative structure of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 ensures that no person is denied access to the courts, and decisions related to property rights, religious freedom and public charitableness are taken within the limits of fairness and validity.
- Through these changes the Amendment Act brings judicial accountability, transparency and fairness
- This Amendment Act clearly stands on a solid constitutional basis and does not violate any provision of Part III of the Constitution.
- The Act respects the essential religious practices of the Muslim community and leaves cases related to faith and worship untouched, while legitimately regulates secular and administrative aspects of Waqf management approved by the Constitution.
- The amendment confirms that the identification and regulation of Waqf property should be subject to legal standards
- Amendment ensures that no person is denied access to courts
- Amendment ensures that decisions related to property rights and religious freedom are within the limits of fairness and validity
- Amendment brings judicial accountability
- Amendment stands on concrete constitutional basis
- Amendment Act leaves cases of faith and worship untouched
- Amendment respects the essential religious practices of Muslims
- This Act only regulates secular and administrative aspects of Waqf.
- The compulsory system for the registration of ‘Waqf’ by the user was already present
- Despite this, private and government land claimed as Waqf and ‘Waqf’ by the user
The government said that from 1923, registration was mandatory for all types of Waqf, including ‘Waqf by users’ since 1923, yet the individuals or organizations continued to declare private land and government land as Waqf, including ‘Waqf by the user’. This not only violated the valuable property rights of the citizens but also made unfair claims on public assets. The Center said that many Waqf properties are related to the rights and claims of people of other communities. The previous Waqf system was a paradise for the property grabbing and illegal occupiers, but now the regulation of such assets can also be a matter of public system.
Central government on Waqf
- Waqf by user was a safe paradise to grab government and private properties
- Waqf’s wealth has increased by 116 times since 2016
- For the last hundred years, Waqf by user has been not oral but through registration.
- Waqf Board is not a Muslim religious institution
- Amendment law in accordance with constitution
- Not against the fundamental rights mentioned in the Article of the Constitution. Nor does it violate anyone’s rights
- The court cannot stop the law made by Parliament
(Tagstotranslate) Supreme Court (T) Waqf Amendment Act (T) Central Government (T) Central Government in Supreme Court (T) Central Government on Waqf Amenment Act (T) Supreme Court (T) Supreme Court (T) Government (T) Central Government (T) In the Supreme Court (T) The Central Government (T) Increased property of the Central Government (T) Claims of the Central Government (T) WAQF Property Increased (T) Central Government Affidavit on Waqf (T) The Central Government's Affairs (T) On Waqf (T) The Central Government on Waqf; Personal case not (T) Partial or complete restriction opposed
