Maulana Arshad Madani, the President of the Islamic cleric body Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind, has approached the Supreme Court against the recently enacted Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, seeking to challenge its constitutional validity.
- The petition has been filed by Advocate Fuzail Ahmad Ayyubi.
- It terms several provisions of the Amendment as unconstitutional and harmful to the existing waqf jurisprudence and administrative framework in India.
"The petition seeks an interim direction from the Supreme Court to instruct the Union of India to defer the notification under Section 1(2) of the Amendment Act," the petitioner stated.
The concern is that once notified, the amendment would activate mandatory timelines for uploading waqf property details on a new portal and database.
This could severely impact several waqf properties, especially those:
- Created through oral dedication
- Without any formal documentation
- Of historic or traditional origin
"The removal of the concept of 'waqf by user' is deeply concerning," the petition notes.
This principle has long been a rule of evidence in Indian waqf law.
It was even recognised by the Supreme Court in the Ramjanmabhumi-Babri Masjid judgment.
The petitioner argues that its removal undermines Islamic charitable practices and threatens old institutions like:
- Mosques
- Graveyards
Many of these lack documentation but are protected under the principle of waqf by usage.
- The petition objects to Section 3D and 3E, added through an amendment proposed by Shri Kiren Rijiju during the Lok Sabha debate on April 2.
"Under these sections, waqf declarations over ASI-protected monuments are considered invalid, and no waqf can be made over properties belonging to Scheduled Tribes."
- This provision, according to the petitioner, is not only discriminatory, but also an overreach of executive power.
- The recomposition of the Central Waqf Council and State Waqf Boards is also contested.
"The dilution or removal of the Muslim-majority requirement in these bodies infringes on the religious community’s rights to manage its own institutions."
The petition also challenges:
The removal of the requirement that the CEO of Waqf Boards must be a Muslim
The loss of power for State Boards to:
- Determine whether a property qualifies as waqf
- Remove chairpersons through no-confidence motions
- Appoint their own Chief Executive Officers independently
"By making the Limitation Act applicable to waqf properties, the amendment encourages encroachments and adverse possession claims."
The petition highlights that waqf properties are inalienable and perpetual.
The unique (sui generis) nature of these properties had, until now, protected them from such legal challenges.
The petition raises alarm over:
- The removal of finality from Waqf Tribunal decisions
- The shift of rule-making powers entirely to the central government
- Procedural complexities like mandatory public notices in newspapers without clarifying who is an “affected person”
"These provisions expose waqf properties to procedural uncertainties and potential exploitation by vested interests," the plea asserts.
The petition argues that the Waqf Amendment Act, 2025:
- Overrides the denominational and representative principles of the original Waqf Act, 1995
- Substitutes it with a centralised executive control regime
"The amended law violates fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 15, 16, 25, 26, and 300A of the Constitution of India."
- An interim stay on the notification of the Act under Section 1(2)
- A declaration that the impugned provisions are unconstitutional
- A directive to protect historic and undocumented waqf properties from sudden procedural mandates
