Waqf ruling: SC’s stay on Govt’s arbitrary use of power that challenged courts’ authority

The Supreme Court has stayed key provisions of the Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025 after finding that the statute, while well-intentioned, was vitiated by logical and legal drawbacks, since its proviso to Section 3C (2) and related sub-sections embodied arbitrariness and undermined the constitutional right to property, although parts of the amendment dealing with minority rights and tribal land protection remain open to challenge.

The Court noted that the proviso allowed a Waqf property to be stripped of its legal status the moment an allegation was made that it encroached upon government land, and it found that the law did not prescribe prior notice or hearing for the Waqf management before such a freeze, while leaving the property’s fate in the hands of a government officer rather than a judicial forum.

The Bench pointed out that the inquiry into whether the property belonged to the government was assigned to a designated officer without fixed timelines, which meant that charitable institutions such as schools or hospitals under a Waqf could be left in limbo for years, and that the statute did not guarantee a fair hearing during the probe.

The judgment observed that the power vested in a government officer above the rank of District Collector to determine property titles usurped the role of courts and tribunals, which alone are competent to decide ownership disputes, and the provision allowing alteration of revenue records further risked turning Waqf assets into government property by fait accompli.

The Court also struck down the provision empowering State Governments to instruct Waqf Boards to delete such properties from their records, holding that the entire process was unilateral, unconstitutional and a violation of the doctrine of separation of powers, which forms part of the Constitution’s basic structure.

While staying these provisions, the Court held that the status of a Waqf property would remain intact until a Waqf Tribunal decided the dispute, with scope for review by the High Court, and it barred the management from alienating such property during the inquiry so that public interest would not suffer if the land were later proved to be public.

In parallel, the Court reinforced the right of minority communities to continue religious observances in Waqf properties even when declared protected monuments, and it confirmed that the Amendment Act sought to safeguard the lands of tribal communities against encroachment or alienation.

It also indirectly revived the deleted Section 104 of the 1995 Act by recognising that non-Muslims could still create or support trusts for the same religious and charitable purposes once permitted under that provision.