Government to Supreme Court: Registration of Waqf Properties Since 1923, Not for Political Reasons
New Delhi: The government has submitted to the Supreme Court that the requirement to register all types of waqf properties, including those created by users, has been in place since 1923. This legal mandate, the Centre argued, was deliberately ignored to serve vested interests, a problem aimed at being addressed by the Waqf Amendment Act, 2025.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta on Wednesday challenged the arguments of senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who is representing the Muslim community in a challenge to the validity of the 2025 law. Mehta pointed out that the petitioners had attempted to mislead the court, making false statements or omitting key provisions on several issues.
SG: Muslim Side Made False Claims to Project Misleading Picture to SC
Mehta highlighted that Sibal had made false statements or suppressed provisions related to several issues, including the content of the bill after incorporating JPC recommendations, the status of ancient Islamic monuments, the composition of the Waqf Council and Boards, inquiries into disputed waqf land, and the identification of government land treated as waqf.
Mehta noted that the law had mandated that only a Muslim could create a waqf and that it must be registered since 1923. However, before the 2014 Lok Sabha elections, the UPA government in December 2013 amended the Waqf Act, 1995, to allow anyone to make a waqf, ostensibly to appease Muslims and for vote-bank politics.
Sibal had argued that the requirement for registration of waqf properties had been inserted in the new law to appropriate properties of Muslims. Mehta countered this, asking how someone could declare another person’s property, even if it had been used for a long time, as a waqf, or declare encroached government land as waqf without inquiry and proof.
Mehta emphasized that none of the affected parties had approached the Supreme Court directly, and the challenge was through public interest litigation (PILs). He also mentioned that the government had appointed a three-member committee comprising distinguished individuals to study the issue of mismanagement of waqf properties. The committee’s 1976 report highlighted the prevalence of concealment and non-registration of waqf properties, recommending that unregistered waqfs could not be the subject of legal suits.
Mehta explained that in 1984, Parliament amended the Waqf Act and provided that no suit could be filed regarding an unregistered waqf. However, due to political reasons, this amendment was not implemented. He noted that this provision was present in the Waqf Act, 1995, but was removed by the 2013 amendment, which the UPA government introduced before the 2014 Lok Sabha elections.
Mehta dismissed Sibal’s argument that once a government officer declares a property not to be a waqf without judicial review, Muslims had no remedy. He stated that every process of identifying government or private land is subject to the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code and is amenable to court challenges.
For government or private parties to claim title over land wrongly identified as waqf property, the concerned party must approach a civil court for ownership title, which is a judicial process. Mehta also mentioned that the Ministry of Minority Affairs had assured the Joint Parliamentary Committee in writing and filed an affidavit before the Supreme Court, declaring that a maximum of four out of the 22 members in the Central Waqf Council and three out of the 11 in state Auqaf Boards could be non-Muslims.
Mehta refuted the argument that the number of Muslims on waqf bodies would significantly decrease under the new law, stating that this does not alter the minority character of the councils and boards. He also noted that the Ancient Monuments Preservation Act of 1904 and 1958 categorically states that the religious character of ancient and protected monuments, more than 100 years old, would not change, regardless of their status as waqf property. The arguments will continue on Thursday.