{"id":63692,"date":"2025-09-16T10:57:28","date_gmt":"2025-09-16T05:27:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/?p=63692"},"modified":"2025-09-16T11:17:05","modified_gmt":"2025-09-16T05:47:05","slug":"supreme-courts-interim-stay-on-waqf-amendment-act-2025","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/supreme-courts-interim-stay-on-waqf-amendment-act-2025\/","title":{"rendered":"Supreme Court\u2019s Interim Stay on Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025"},"content":{"rendered":"<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025 Latest News\u00a0<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Supreme Court of India passed an interim order <\/span><b>staying select provisions <\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">of <\/span><strong><a href=\"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/upsc-exam\/waqf-amendment-act-2025\/\" target=\"_blank\">the Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025<\/a><\/strong><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, while <\/span><b>refusing to impose a blanket stay on the entire law<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025 (passed in April 2025) had <\/span><b>introduced sweeping changes<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> in the management of Waqf properties, <\/span><b>leading to widespread constitutional challenges.<\/b><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>Background &#8211; Challenge to the Act<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Petitioners<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: Political leaders and organisations (including AIMIM MP Asaduddin Owaisi, TMC MP Mahua Moitra, RJD MP Manoj Kumar Jha, YSR Congress, and CPI). Around <\/span><b>65 petitions<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> consolidated before the Supreme Court.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Grounds of challenge:<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Violation of <\/span><b>Article 26<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (right to manage religious affairs) of the Constitution and alleged <\/span><b>infringement of the autonomy <\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">of the Muslim community in managing Waqf properties.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Test of constitutionality<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">:\u00a0<\/span>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Generally, no law is stayed in its entirety because the Constitution\u2019s <\/span><b>Article 13(2)<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> clearly says that only the provisions that contravene fundamental rights are void.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The bench did exactly this in the interim order and stayed a few provisions of the Act.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>Supreme Court\u2019s Interim Relief<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li><b>Powers of District Collectors (Section 3C):<\/b>\n<ul>\n<li><b>Provision stayed<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: District Collectors\u2019 powers to declare a Waqf property as government property during inquiry.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><b>Reason<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: Prima facie arbitrary and contrary to the principle of separation of powers.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><b>Interim safeguard:<\/b>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Property to retain Waqf status during inquiry.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Waqfs not to be dispossessed.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">No third-party rights to be created until final decision by a Waqf Tribunal.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><b>Inclusion of non-muslims in Waqf Boards:<\/b>\n<ul>\n<li><b>The new law <\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">allowed for a non-Muslim majority in Waqf boards and the Central Waqf Council.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><b>Direction issued by SC to avoid ambiguity:<\/b>\n<ul>\n<li><b>Central Waqf Council<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, which has 22 members, shall not consist of more than four non-Muslim members.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li><b>State Waqf Boards<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, with 11 members, shall not have more than three non-Muslim members.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><b>Rationale<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: To prevent violation of a community&#8217;s right to religious self-management.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><b>Five-year rule for practising Islam:<\/b>\n<ul>\n<li><b>Provision stayed:<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Requirement that only a Muslim practising Islam for at least 5 years could create a Waqf.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><b>Condition<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: Stay will continue until the government frames rules specifying mechanisms to determine religious practice.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>Provisions not Stayed<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li aria-level=\"1\"><b>Abolition of \u201cWaqf by Use\u201d:<\/b><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"list-style-type: none;\">\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><b>Background<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: This long-standing principle meant that land used for Muslim religious or charitable purposes for a long time could be deemed to be a Waqf even if it was not formally registered as such.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><b>Petitioners\u2019 argument:<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> They had strongly opposed the omission of the concept of \u201cWaqf by use\u201d.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><b>Government stance<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: The government had argued that this concept was being misused to <\/span><b>encroach <\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">upon government lands.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><b>Court\u2019s view<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: The court did not find a prima facie case to stay the prospective abolition of this concept.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li aria-level=\"1\"><b>Applicability of the Limitation Act:<\/b><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li style=\"list-style-type: none;\">\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><b>Earlier law (1995 Act)<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: It had specifically excluded the application of the Limitation Act, which allowed Waqfs to act against encroachments on their properties without any time limit.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><b>Amendment (2025 Act)<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: The 2025 law removed this exemption, meaning legal claims against encroachment must be made within a specific period.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><b>Court\u2019s observation<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: This corrects earlier discrimination; provision not stayed.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>Significance of the Interim Order<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Balances <\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">community rights with government\u2019s regulatory powers.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Prevents <\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">arbitrary dispossession of Waqf properties while ensuring disputes are adjudicated by Waqf Tribunals.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Provides clarity<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> on non-Muslim participation limits in Waqf bodies.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>Broader Concerns<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Property rights vs. religious law<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">:\u00a0<\/span>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The court <\/span><b>upheld the exclusion<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> of non-Muslims from creating Waqf, despite historical precedents.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><b>For example<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, in Motishah v. Abdul Gaffar (1956), the Nagpur HC upheld the right of non-Muslims to create a waqf.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Critics argue it <\/span><b>infringes property rights<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> and <\/span><b>limits philanthropy for secular causes<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (schools, hospitals, roads).<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Secular state dilemma<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: Allowing officials to judge \u201cgood Muslims\u201d vs \u201cbad Muslims\u201d challenges India\u2019s secular and liberal democratic framework.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Comparative lens<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist and Jain endowment laws have their own limitations, raising parity questions.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Missed opportunity: <\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Act could have been a step toward Uniform Civil Code (<\/span><b>UCC<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">) covering all religious endowments.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>Conclusion<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The matter remains <\/span><b>sub judice<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, with the stay operative until final adjudication of constitutional validity.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The case will <\/span><b>test the balance<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> between religious freedoms under Article 26, secular state oversight, and property rights.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>A final ruling will have significant implications<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> for the governance of Waqf properties, minority rights, and the principle of separation of powers in India\u2019s constitutional framework.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>Source: <\/b><a href=\"https:\/\/indianexpress.com\/article\/explained\/explained-law\/supreme-court-amended-waqf-act-what-stayed-10251418\/#:~:text=The%20stay%20will%20remain%20in%20effect%20until%20the%20government%20frames,years%20is%20to%20be%20ascertained.&amp;text=The%20Supreme%20Court%20refused%20the,stay%20two%20other%20major%20changes.\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\"><b>IE<\/b><\/a><b>\u00a0| <\/b><a href=\"https:\/\/indianexpress.com\/article\/opinion\/columns\/scs-interim-order-offers-no-relief-from-several-problematic-provisions-of-waqf-law-10251988\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\"><b>IE<\/b><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The SC passed an interim order staying select provisions of the Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025, while refusing to impose a blanket stay on the entire law.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":19,"featured_media":63700,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[18],"tags":[60,22,59,2717],"class_list":{"0":"post-63692","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-upsc-mains-current-affairs","8":"tag-mains-articles","9":"tag-upsc-current-affairs","10":"tag-upsc-mains-current-affairs","11":"tag-waqf-amendment-act-2025","12":"no-featured-image-padding"},"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63692","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/19"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=63692"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63692\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/63700"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=63692"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=63692"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=63692"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}