The law on the modification of the WAQF will be heard tomorrow at the Supreme Court, now DMK has raised questions about the Affidavit of the Center – Supreme Court to hear please dispute the law on amendment WAQF Constitutional validity NTCPAN
Monday, petitions contesting the constitutional validity of the law on the modification of the WAQF will be heard before the Supreme Court. Earlier, the Supreme Court had prohibited two main aspects of this law at the last hearing. On April 17, the Center assured the Supreme Court that it would not denate the WAQF properties, including the “WAQF by the User” before May 5, and would make no appointments at the WAQF Central Council and the Boards of Directors.
The Supreme Court asked for an answer
General solicitor Tushar Mehta, presented by the Center, gave assurance to the bench of chief judge Sanjeev Khanna, judge Sanjay Kumar and the judge of justice, affirming that the law adopted after the discussions of the Parliament should not be arrested without hearing the government. The Center had also opposed the Court’s proposal to adopt a provisional order against denomination against the name of WAQF properties, including “WAQF by the User”, in addition to prohibiting the provision allowing non-Muslims to include non-Muslims of the Central WAQF Council and Boards of Directors.
The Supreme Court examined the arguments of the general request and said that the WAQF properties, including the notification or notification already recorded, including “WAQF by User”, will not be tanned or denoted until the next hearing. After that, the court granted the center one week to file a response on the petitions contesting the validity of the law and the next hearing of the case was set on May 5.
The central government has given a post
A bench with three judges from the Supreme Court will hear five petitions on Monday, whose title is “WAQF (Amendment) ACT 2025” and new petitions linked to this issue. This group of petitions also includes a petition deposited by the head of the Aimim and the deputy of Hyderabad Asuadddin Owaisi. In its affidavit, on April 25, the center defended the revised law and opposed any “complete suspension” by the Court on the law adopted by the Parliament. In addition, the supply of “WAQF by user” properties has been justified.
The Minority Ministry of Affairs has cited the provisions of the old Waqf laws in a 1,332 pages counter and declared that the registration of WAQF properties, including “WAQF by User”, has been compulsory since 1923. The government has declared that the WAQF Muslims law (amendment), leaving “destroyed”.
The government said that after the 2013 modification in law, Waqf lands increased by 20 Lakh Acres. At the same time, he was accused of improper use of the Waqf provisions to capture private and governmental property. The center urged the Supreme Court to reject the petitions against the Waqf law (amendment) and described it as a very shocking that after the 2013 amendment, there was an increase of 116% in the Aukaf region.
AIMPLB has raised questions
On the other hand, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board questioned the data of the central government in its counter-affidavit. In its affidavit filed on the government’s response to the Supreme Court, the Council declared that the government is misleading the Supreme Court. The Council maintains that this case is linked to WAQF properties. AIMPLB described the government’s affidavit as the data rigging and said the government claims an increase in WAQF properties, which is false.
The Council demanded an action against the officer who filed this affidavit. Before the hearing before the Supreme Court, the Personal Law Council of Muslim India filed a response to the Supreme Court. In his answer, the Muslim Personal Board alleged that the central government had filed an affidavit to mislead the court on this issue. The board of directors also opposed the government’s assertion that after 2013, ownership of the offices recorded in the central portal increased a lot.
DMK said rules
In the ACT case modified by the WAQF, DMK also deposited an affidavit at the Supreme Court in response to the Affidavit of the Central Government. In its statement of reprisals, the DMK affirmed that the adoption of the WAQF bill (amendment), 2025 is a violation of parliamentary rules and procedures. On behalf of the party, it was said that during the discussion of the joint parliamentary committee, that is to say JPC, around 95% of the stakeholders present before the Committee firmly opposes the bill. The remaining 5% supported the bill.
The DMK declared in the affidavit that the details of the meetings of the joint parliamentary committee held in Delhi and other places were not available for the members of the Committee. It is also a direct violation of established parliamentary standards of transparency. The JPC report project was distributed to members on January 28, 2025, when it was to be decided on January 29, 2025.
Read also: AIMPLB has raised questions about the Affidavit of the Center, said – the government is misleading
The members of the opposition parties involved in the JPC also raised serious questions on the committee’s recommendations and the validity of the adoption of the bill, highlighting the mentality of exceeding the standard parliamentary process. The opposition indicates that the time and the way in which the government has done contested legislative work shows the ignorance of the legitimate principles of legislative transparency, democratic ideology and procedural impartiality.
During the hearing in the case, the Supreme Court had refused to examine any new request against the law on the modification of the WAQF and said that it had already been clearly indicated that the Court will only hear five of the more than 70 justiciable on the issue. The center informed the 2025 WAQF law (amendment) last month, which was approved by President Draupadi Murmu on April 5. The bill was adopted by Lok Sabha with the support of 288 members, while 232 deputies were against. At the same time, 128 members voted in his favor in Rajya Sabha and 95 in opposition.
