Constitutionality of Waqf Amendment Act | Day 2: No new appointments to Boards or Council till next hearing, Union assures SC
Constitutionality of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025Today, a Bench of Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna with Justices P.V. Sanjay Kumar and K.V. Viswanathan granted the Union government seven days to file its response in the challenges to the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. The Court also modified the case title to In re: Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025.
Even as the Court stated that it would not grant an interim stay on the 2025 Act, it recorded the Union’s assurance that no new appointments would be made to the Waqf Council or any State Waqf Boards until the next hearing. It further directed that the status of properties recognised as waqf by user would not be altered in the meantime.
Yesterday, the Court had contemplated granting interim reliefs in the case, but had refrained from passing the orders. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, leading the arguments on the petitioners’ side, had contended that the 2025 amendments violated the constitutional right of religious minorities to manage their own affairs.
Union: This issue cannot be decided based on a tentative reading
As soon as the Bench assembled, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta addressed the judges. He submitted that it was essential that the Court consider the historical evolution of the Waqf law since 1923 before contemplating an interim stay on the new Amendment Act.
“We will have to take you through history,” Mehta stated, and insisted that to answer the questions in the case, the Court will need assistance. He reiterated that the 2025 Amendment Act was passed after a lot of deliberation and consideration.
CJI Khanna stated that they would not stay the Act at this stage, but clarified that while the case is pending before the Court, the situation must not change in a way that the rights of the parties are impacted. He expressed concern that appointing new members to the Waqf Boards and Council, during the pendency of the case, could create complications.
Mehta promptly assured the Bench that no new members would be appointed to any Waqf Boards or Council until the next hearing. “My reading of the provision is that nothing can happen within a week even if the government wants it to,” he said. Mehta further informed the Bench that if any appointments were made during this time, they could be declared void.
Declaration vs registration: Status of waqf by user properties
The other big question in the case concerns the fate of waqf by user properties— those long used for religious or charitable purposes without formal deeds. The 2025 Act abolishes this recognition for future waqf properties.
Today, the Bench directed that no such properties would be “denotified” before the second hearing. This included those that were declared or registered. Mehta, reiterated his argument from yesterday that, according to the law, even a waqf by user had to be “registered” since 1923. The petitioners protested, stating that several old waqf by user properties lacked registration.
Bench: We cannot hear all 100 petitions separately
Currently, nearly 100 petitions have been filed in this case. To bring order to the chaos in the proceedings, the Court not only renamed the case, but also directed both sides to appoint nodal counsel responsible for compiling documents and filings.
Mehta informed the Court that Advocate Kanu Aggarwal would be the nodal counsel for the respondents. On the petitioners’ side, Advocate Vikas Jain was appointed.
The Bench also clarified that it would hear arguments from only five counsels for the petitioners. The Bench also said that the petition challenging the Waqf Act of 1995 and its 2013 amendments would be heard separately.
The case is scheduled to be heard next in the week, commencing from 5 May 2025.