The Supreme Court heard the petitions contesting the constitutionality of the law on the modification of the WAQF on Monday. CJI Sanjeev Khanna avoided the hearing and said that a long hearing was necessary before passing a provisional order on this subject.
The court postponed the hearing on the case until the next date. Cji Khanna retired on May 13. In such a situation, the next CJI Br Gavai will hear this case.
Judge Br Gawai will take an oath as chief judge of the Supreme Court from May 14. Now the hearing of this case will take place on May 15.
Earlier, on April 17, the Supreme Court, while hearing these petitions, had prohibited new appointments in councils such as the central council of WAQF, while hearing these petitions. The Supreme Court had asked for an answer to the government on these petitions and also gave the petitioner time to file a resumption of this response.
What has been said in the affidavit by the government
In the affidavit filed by the central government concerning the law on the modification of the WAQF, the Waqf Bai user has been corrected. In the affidavit of page 1332, given by the Minority Ministry of Affairs of the Supreme Court, citing the provisions of the old WAQF law, it has been said that the registration of WAQF properties, including the “WAQF by the User”, has been compulsory since 1923. The government has declared that the WAQF law (amendment).
In this affidavit deposited by the government, it was also said that after the 2013 amendment in this law, there was an increase of 20 Lakh acres in Waqf land. The abusive use of WAQF provisions has also been accused of improper use of private and governmental property. The center urged the Supreme Court to reject the petitions filed 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.
What was said to Counter-Affidavit
The All India Muslim Personal Law Board also deposited an affidavit in response to the affidavit deposited by the central government. Questions have been raised on the data provided in the affidavit deposited by the central government in the counter-current affidavit. The Muslim Personal Law Board declared in his reprisals that the government deceives the Supreme Court.
