A major body of Sunni Muslim scholars and clerics from Kerala, Samastha Kerala Jamiatul Ulema, has filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court of India against the recently passed Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. The petition challenges the constitutionality of the new legislation, which received Presidential assent just a day ago.
The religious organization contends that the new law makes sweeping and alarming changes to the existing Waqf Act, 1995, particularly in how waqf properties—Islamic endowments for charitable purposes—are administered. They argue that these changes are unconstitutional, violate fundamental rights under Articles 14, 25, and 26 of the Constitution, and risk alienating the Muslim community from its religious and charitable assets.
“The cumulative effect of the amendments is to deprive the Muslim community of large tracts of waqf properties,” the petition says.
The petition stresses that the amendments do not enhance the management or transparency of waqfs. Instead, they strike at the core concept of waqf in Islamic law and tradition.
1. Removal of the 'Waqf by User' Principle
The petition strongly objects to the deletion of the ‘Waqf by User’ clause by amending Section 2(r). Under Islamic jurisprudence, a written deed isn’t necessary to establish a waqf. Many waqfs in India have existed for centuries based solely on public use and community acknowledgment.
“Removing ‘waqf by user’ opens the door to challenge these historic waqfs as private or government properties,” the clerics argue.
They note that this concept has been upheld in previous judgments, including the Ayodhya-Babri Masjid verdict, making its removal deeply problematic.
2. Inclusion of Non-Muslims in Waqf Governance Bodies
The amended law mandates the inclusion of two non-Muslim members (excluding ex-officio posts) in both the Central Waqf Council and State Waqf Boards.
The petition argues this is an unconstitutional intrusion into the right of religious communities to manage their own affairs, a right protected under Article 26 of the Constitution.
Also challenged is the removal of the requirement that the CEO of the Waqf Board must be a Muslim.
3. Government Becoming a Judge in Its Own Cause
Section 3C of the amended Act allows the government to declare a waqf property as non-waqf if it overlaps with government property. A government-appointed officer is given the authority to resolve such disputes.
“This means the government can judge its own case. It’s a biased mechanism, and worse, there's no time limit for the officer to complete the inquiry. That keeps the property in limbo,” the petition warns.
The clerics point out that this goes against established principles of interim civil relief, where courts usually maintain status quo or decide based on balance of convenience until a case is resolved.
Read Also:- President Approves Waqf Amendment Act 2025
4. Unrealistic Information Requirements
Another contentious provision is Section 3B, which demands that all waqfs register detailed information, including the name and address of the creator, the mode, and the date of creation.
The petition highlights that many waqfs are over 100 years old and have no available documentation. It alleges that the new law has been structured in such a way that makes compliance nearly impossible.
“There’s a mala fide intention here to render waqfs unregistrable,” the petitioner organization claims.
5. Restrictions on Who Can Create Waqfs
The law also restricts waqf creation to individuals who have practiced Islam for at least five years. This, the petition argues, is an arbitrary and baseless condition.
Further, the amendment stating that waqf-alal-aulad (waqf for family members) should not affect inheritance rights is criticized as excessive State interference in the management of one’s private property.
6. Disqualification of Waqfs Over Protected Monuments
Section 3D of the amendment declares that any waqf over a monument protected by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) is void. This move has also come under attack for being excessive and ignoring historical waqf status.
Additionally, Section 3E is said to be a targeted attempt to deprive Muslim members of Scheduled Tribes, living in areas under the Fifth and Sixth Schedules of the Constitution, from managing or creating waqf properties.
This is not an isolated petition. Political leaders and civil rights groups have also approached the Supreme Court to oppose the Act:
- Asaduddin Owaisi, MP from AIMIM
- Mohammed Jawed, Congress MP
- Amanatullah Khan, Delhi AAP MLA
- Association for Protection of Civil Rights (APCR)
- Jamiat Ulema President Maulana Arshad Madani
Each of them has raised serious objections about how the new law affects the autonomy and heritage of the Muslim community.
The petition by Samastha Kerala Jamiatul Ulema has been filed through Advocate-on-Record Zulfikar Ali P.S., who emphasizes that the law is not just constitutionally flawed, but also administratively unworkable and discriminatory.
