Waqf Amendment Act, 2025: Provisions & Concerns

The Supreme Court has partially stayed the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, putting on hold key provisions –
1. 5-year Islam practice rule for creating a waqf.
2. Collector’s power to decide if the land is waqf or government property.
Additionally, it ordered that for now, State Waqf Boards can have a maximum of 3 non-Muslims and the Central Waqf Board a maximum of 4 non-Muslims as members.
The rest of the provisions of the Act remain in effect.

About Waqf Amendment Act, 2025

The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, also known as the UMEED Act (Unified Management Empowerment Efficiency and Development), was passed by Parliament in April 2025.
It was aimed at reforming the Waqf Act of 1995, the legislation seeks to enhance transparency, accountability, and efficiency in managing Waqf properties.

A Waqf is a donation of personal property by Muslims for religious, charitable, or private purposes, with the ownership believed to belong to God.
A Waqf can be established through a written document, spoken agreement, or if a property has been used for religious or charitable purposes over time.
Once a property is declared as Waqf, its status changes permanently and cannot be reversed.

Waqf properties are governed by the Waqf Act, of 1995, which replaced the Central Waqf Act, of 1954.
The Act includes provisions for the constitution and appointment of Waqf Boards, Waqf Councils, and Chief Executive Officers in the states.
Central Waqf Council (CWC): A statutory body established in 1964, oversees and advises state-level Waqf Boards across India.
2013 Amendment to Waqf Act 1995:
- Authority to Waqf Boards to designate a property as Waqf.
- Prescribed imprisonment of up to two years for encroachment on Waqf property
- Explicitly prohibit the sale, gift, exchange, mortgage, or transfer of Waqf property.
Management and Oversight:
- Waqf properties are managed by a mutawalli (caretaker) and are overseen by a survey commissioner who maintains a list of all Waqf properties.
- Disputes related to Waqf properties are resolved by a Waqf Tribunal constituted by the state government.
- The Tribunal is constituted by the state government and comprises three members:
  1. Chairperson: State judicial officer with rank not below District Judge, Sessions Judge, or Civil Judge, Class I.
  2. Includes an officer from the State Civil Services.
  3. Person expert in Muslim Law and jurisprudence.

Waqf Boards act as custodians of Waqf properties in their respective states.
Composition: It is led by a chairperson and includes state government nominees, Muslim legislators and parliamentarians, Muslim members of the state Bar Council, Islamic scholars, and mutawallis of Waqfs with an income of Rs 1 lakh or more annually.
Waqf Boards have the authority to recover lost properties and sanction the transfer of immovable Waqf property (e.g., by sale, gift, or lease). Such transfers require approval from at least two-thirds of the Waqf Board members.

Opaque and Poorly Managed Land Records: Over 2 lakh Waqf properties lacked digital records, making them vulnerable to illegal occupation and disputes. (UP Audit Report, 2023)
Arbitrary Use of Section 40: State Waqf Boards were unilaterally misusing Section 40 to declare private lands as Waqf.
- E.g., In Punjab (2022), farmlands owned by non-Muslims were declared Waqf, leading to legal disputes and public protests.
Lack of Legal Recourse: Decisions of Waqf Tribunals were final, violating principles of natural justice. Affected individuals lacked a mechanism to challenge tribunal decisions. E.g., Telangana (2023) land cases.
Massive Encroachments and Underutilization: Reports from Maharashtra (2021) and Karnataka (2022) exposed encroachments on over 700 Waqf plots and undervalued leasing of prime properties.
Exclusion of Women and Minorities: A 2022 RTI revealed that over 90% of Waqf Boards lacked female representation, undermining inclusivity and diversity in governance.

Abolition of ‘Waqf by User’ prospectively: Prevents arbitrary claims based on usage without proper documentation.
Deletion of Section 40: Waqf Boards can no longer unilaterally designate private property as waqf.
Application of Limitation Act, 1963: 12-year bar on claims for recovery of waqf property.

Inheritance protection for women and orphans: Waqf cannot override their legally valid rights.
Representation mandate: At least 2 women members and adequate representation for Sunni, Shia, Bohra, and OBC-Muslims.
Inclusion of non-Muslims: A minimum of 2 non-Muslim members are required on each Waqf Board.

CEO eligibility broadened: No restrictions on religion; open to qualified candidates from any community.
Mandatory audits: Annual audits for entities with income above ₹1 lakh; subject to CAG scrutiny.
Waqf Tribunal reforms: Headed by District Judge + Joint Secretary + Expert in Islamic law.
Provision for appeal: The Tribunal orders are appealable to the High Court within 90 days.

Online portal and digital database: All waqf properties must be registered online within 6 months.
Land title verification by District Collector or above: Ensures independent validation of ownership.

Reduction in mandatory contribution to Waqf Board: From 7% to 5% of annual income.
District-level oversight committees: Improved local governance and accountability.
Institutional grievance redressal mechanism: Faster citizen-centric response system.

Violation of Religious Autonomy: Undermines Articles 25 and 26 by interfering in the community’s right to manage religious affairs independently.
Excessive Government Control: Empowers district collectors and state authorities over Waqf matters, risking bureaucratic overreach and delays.
Dilution of Waqf Board’s Authority: Deletion of Section 40 allows the government, not the Waqf Board, to declare Waqf properties, weakening institutional independence.
Inclusion of Non-Muslims in Waqf Boards: This is perceived as undermining the religious integrity and cultural understanding necessary for Waqf administration.
Removal of ‘Waqf by User’: Threatens long-used community religious spaces that gained status through customary worship.
Weak Dispute Resolution Mechanism: Abolishing Waqf Tribunals and vesting powers in collectors may lead to inefficiency and a lack of legal expertise.
Lack of Stakeholder Consultation: Drafted without adequate input from Muslim bodies like AIMPLB, raising concerns about inclusivity and transparency.

Establish Dedicated Waqf Benches: Judicial oversight through fast-track benches or High Court cells to ensure timely justice.
Create a Centralised National Waqf Registry: Linked with state records, GIS, and public portals for transparency and real-time updates.
Promote PPP-Based Waqf Development: Encourage socially conscious private investment while preserving the sanctity and purpose of Waqf.
Form Community Vigilance Bodies: Include women, youth, and civil society actors to ensure bottom-up accountability and ethical asset use.
Capacity Building and Legal Literacy: Training of Waqf officials and Mutawallis in land law, digital record management, and ethical financial practices.
Model Guidelines for States: The Centre should release harmonised guidelines to ensure consistency in interpretation and implementation across states.