The Supreme Court of India on Thursday declined to stay the Central Government’s recent decision to suspend key provisions of the Waqf Act, even as debates over the controversial legislation continue to intensify. The Union government’s move to put certain sections of the law on hold has drawn mixed reactions, with some viewing it as a step towards reforming land management, while others see it as undermining minority institutions.
The Ministry of Minority Affairs had, through a notification issued earlier this month, put on hold key provisions under Sections 4, 5, and 6 of the Waqf Act, 1995, effectively halting the process of identifying and surveying Waqf properties across states. The Centre claimed this temporary suspension was necessary to assess the implementation and efficacy of the law.
The Supreme Court, however, while hearing petitions challenging the suspension, refused to grant an interim stay, allowing the government’s decision to remain in effect for the time being.
What Are These Waqf Provisions?
The Waqf Act of 1995 governs religious endowments in India made under Islamic law. Waqf properties typically include mosques, graveyards, dargahs, schools, and commercial land whose earnings are used for religious or charitable purposes.
The provisions in question—Sections 4, 5, and 6—are crucial to the process of identifying and notifying such lands:
- Section 4 empowers the state government to conduct a survey of Waqf properties.
- Section 5 deals with the preparation and publication of lists of these properties.
- Section 6 outlines the dispute resolution mechanism if objections are raised about the classification or listing of such properties.
By putting these sections on hold, the government has essentially paused the process of identifying new Waqf properties or resolving disputes related to them.
Centre’s Argument for Suspension
The Union government defended its move in court by stating that a “comprehensive review” of the Waqf Act was underway, and until then, halting these particular provisions was a reasonable administrative step. According to the government, there have been numerous allegations of mismanagement, encroachment, and irregularities related to Waqf properties over the years.
Officials argue that the current system lacks transparency, and the process of classifying land as Waqf has, in some instances, led to tension with other landholding communities. “We are not abolishing the Waqf Act or targeting any community,” a government representative said. “This is an attempt to ensure accountability and fairness in the management of such lands.”
Petitioners Raise Alarm
Petitioners opposing the government’s decision expressed concern over what they called a “selective targeting” of minority institutions. They argued that the sudden halt in key Waqf processes could stall religious and charitable activities and strip the Waqf Boards of their functional powers.
“By putting these provisions on hold without any parliamentary debate or judicial scrutiny, the Centre is bypassing democratic norms,” said senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for one of the petitioners. He warned that such actions may embolden state governments to further dilute Waqf protections on the ground.
The petitioners also expressed concern that freezing the survey process may open the door to illegal encroachments on Waqf land and impede the ability of communities to safeguard their religious spaces.
Political Reactions and Public Response
The move has triggered political reactions across party lines. While BJP leaders have largely supported the Centre’s decision, calling it a step toward eliminating “land mafia and corruption,” opposition parties like the Congress, AIMIM, and Trinamool Congress have criticized the suspension as “unconstitutional” and “communally motivated.”
AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi accused the government of systematically dismantling minority rights under the guise of administrative reform. “Today it’s Waqf; tomorrow it will be something else. This is not reform, it’s a rollback,” he said in a press briefing.
Supreme Court’s Stance
The apex court, while refusing to grant a stay, has sought a detailed response from the government within four weeks. A bench led by Justice Sanjiv Khanna stated, “We cannot intervene at this stage without hearing the Centre’s full reasoning behind the notification. However, the matter requires detailed consideration.”
Legal experts note that while the Supreme Court’s refusal to stay the notification is procedural and not a judgment on its validity, the outcome of this case could have far-reaching consequences on how religious endowments and community land are treated in India.
For now, the ball remains in the government’s court as it works on what it calls “necessary reforms” in Waqf administration—steps that will continue to be scrutinized by both legal observers and community stakeholders in the months ahead.