A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed before the Telangana High Court against the Waqf Amendment Act 2025, alleging that its implementation causes serious harm to the religious, constitutional, and property rights of the Muslim community in the state. The case was presented before a division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Renuka Yara, who adjourned the hearing due to a similar case already pending before the Supreme Court.
Read Also:- Calcutta High Court Permits Suvendu Adhikari’s Visit to Waqf Bill Violence-Hit Areas in Murshidabad
The PIL was filed by Act Public Welfare Foundation, a social group actively involved in addressing issues faced by Waqf institutions in Telangana, such as encroachments and administrative lapses. The petition emphasizes that this new legislation poses an immediate and irreversible threat to institutional protections for waqf properties.
“Implementation of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 by the State of Telangana is likely to cause extensive, immediate, and irreparable injury to the religious, constitutional, and property rights of the Muslim community,” the plea stated.
Read Also:- Kerala Waqf Board Challenges Waqf Amendment Act in SC, Calls It Unconstitutional and Against Secularism
The petition focuses heavily on Section 3C, which allows District Collectors to evaluate property titles and reclassify waqf land as government land. According to the petitioners, this undermines judicial independence and violates natural justice.
Another objection concerns Section 4, which replaces the Survey Commissioner with the District Collector. The petition argues that the Collector, being a state official, may not act impartially in waqf-related matters.
Section 3B has also drawn criticism. It requires that all waqf properties be registered through an online portal. The Foundation contends that many waqf lands, especially in rural areas, are maintained by individuals unfamiliar with digital systems, making this provision exclusionary.
Read Also:- Muslim Bar Council Member Cannot Remain in Waqf Board After Term Ends in Bar Council: SC
“This provision, if operationalised, would lead to irreversible loss of waqf land by administrative fiat, without judicial adjudication,” the plea said about Section 3C(4), highlighting its violation of natural justice and the separation of powers doctrine.
Section 14, which requires a non-Muslim member on the Waqf Board, is described as unconstitutional interference in the internal religious affairs of the Muslim community. Similarly, Section 61(1A) introduces criminal penalties for Mutawallis (custodians of waqf properties) who fail to register properties online. The petition emphasizes that many of them are elderly, unpaid, and lack technological means or legal help.
The plea also raises issues with Section 9, which mandates non-Muslim participation in the Central Waqf Council. It argues that this has downstream effects on state-level policies and undermines community-specific governance.
Read Also:- SC Halts Key Provisions of Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025 After Centre Concedes on Critical Issues
On Section 6, which allows appeals against Waqf Tribunal orders in High Courts, the petition notes that this would cause delays in dispute resolution. Telangana already faces a huge backlog of waqf-related cases, and this amendment could worsen the situation.
Finally, the removal of the term ‘waqf by user’ from the Act is said to harm sites that have long been used for religious purposes by the community without formal documentation.
“In a State where over 57,000 acres of waqf land is under dispute or encroachment, empowering executive authorities to unilaterally nullify statutory board entries undermines both statutory purpose and constitutional due process,” the petition warned.
Read Also:- SC Halts Key Provisions of Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025 After Centre Concedes on Critical Issues
While the High Court advised the petitioner to withdraw the case due to ongoing proceedings in the Supreme Court, the petitioner’s counsel insisted that the PIL only dealt with administrative enforcement within Telangana. As a result, the matter was adjourned for a later date.
Case Title: Act Public Welfare Foundation vs Union of India and Others
