The CJI said if registration of any waqf property had taken place under the erstwhile 1995 Act, then those properties can't be denotified till the next hearing on May 5.
The Supreme Court on Thursday ordered the Centre to file its response within seven days in the challenge to Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 after it was assured by the union government that 'waqf by user' or 'waqf by deed' properties won't be denotified till the next hearing.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justices Sanjay Kumar and K V Viswanathan also recorded the assurance of solicitor general Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, that no appointments in the central Waqf council and boards will be made in the meantime.
The next hearing will be held on May 5, 2025.
Mehta said the government won't denotify "waqf by deed" and "waqf by user" properties till the next hearing.
The CJI said if registration of any waqf property had taken place under the erstwhile 1995 Act, then those properties can't be denotified till the next hearing on May 5.
The bench passed the order after Mehta sought a weeks' time to file a preliminary response to the pleas against the newly-amended waqf law.
"If your lordships will say something about 'waqf by user', what will be the fallout?" he asked.
The bench, on the other hand, said it was impossible to deal with a number of pleas on the issue and clarified it would only hear five of them while asking lawyers to decide among themselves who would argue.
Union and states and waqf boards shall file replies within 7 days.
The petitioners, the bench said, could file their rejoinders to the Centre's reply within five days of the service of the government's response.
Also Read | From Bill To Law: The Journey Of Waqf
During the hearing, the court flagged three major concerns:
Validity of Waqf by User Properties: Properties previously declared as waqf through court decrees may now be rendered void under the new amendments.
Waqf Council Composition: The inclusion of non-Muslims as majority members in the Central Waqf Council was questioned.
Disputed Waqf Properties: The court raised concerns over ongoing inquiries by district collectors into disputed waqf properties, and the legal implications of declaring such properties as non-waqf.
The original version of the bill planned to do away with the “waqf by user” provision—a category where a property is acknowledged as waqf because it has been used for religious activities for some time, despite there being no official declaration or registration as waqf. As per the new bill, waqf properties that are already registered would remain under waqf unless disputed or identified as government land.
In the original bill, the collector was allowed to conduct survey of waqf properties. But after the JPC라이브 바카라 recommendations, the amended bill will propose that a government officer above the rank of collector will investigate government properties claimed as waqf, preventing unwarranted claims.
The waqf bill will also propose that women must receive their rightful inheritance before waqf dedication, with special provisions for widows, divorced women and orphans.
The bill will push for transparent waqf management and demand that Mutawallis must register property details on the central portal within six months.
In a controversial move, the bill proposed that two non-Muslim members will be included in both central and state waqf boards to ensure inclusivity. Many Muslim bodies and leaders have opposed this provision on the grounds that Hindu temples don’t allow any non-Hindus to be a part of the administration.
The bill also tried to end arbitrary property claims by removing Section 40 from the original bill, preventing waqf boards from arbitrarily declaring properties as waqf and avoiding misuse such as declaring entire villages as waqf.
The amendments also include reducing the mandatory contribution of Waqf institutions to Waqf Boards from 7 per cent to 5 per cent, allowing more funds for charity, and government-appointed audits.