Waqf Amendment Act in SC today: 73 petitions filed, 7 states defend law

The Supreme Court will hear 73 petitions today challenging the Waqf Amendment Act, as seven states defend its constitutionality and petitioners raise concerns over religious autonomy

he Supreme Court will begin hearing a batch of 73 petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf Amendment Act today (April 16). The hearing, scheduled to start at 2 pm, will be conducted by a three-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, along with Justices Sanjay Kumar and KV Viswanathan, reported India Today.

 

The Waqf Amendment Act, which was passed by Parliament and signed into law by President Droupadi Murmu on April 5, has sparked widespread protests and legal challenges across the nation. While the Centre argues that the law brings transparency and accountability in managing Waqf properties, petitioners claim that it violates constitutional rights and threatens religious autonomy.

 

Who’s challenging the law then?

 

Among the petitioners are political leaders and religious organisations, including:

 

- Political figures like AIMIM MP Asaduddin Owaisi, AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan, Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra, RJD MPs Manoj Kumar Jha and Faiyyaz Ahmad, and Congress MP Mohammad Jawed.

 

- Religious groups such as the Samastha Kerala Jamiathul Ulema, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, and Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind President Maulana Arshad Madani.

 

- Opposition parties including the Congress, Trinamool Congress, CPI, YSRCP, Samajwadi Party, TVK (actor Vijay’s party), RJD, JDU, AIMIM, AAP, and the Indian Union Muslim League.

 

Two Hindu petitioners—advocate Hari Shankar Jain and Noida resident Parul Khera—have also filed pleas. Jain alleges that certain provisions allow Muslims to "illegally take over" government and Hindu religious land.

 

Also Read: How is a Waqf created, and what are the powers of Waqf Board?

 

What are the main concerns?

 

Petitioners argue that the Waqf Amendment Act:

 

- Eliminates elections to Waqf boards, undermining their democratic and representative structure.

 

- Allows non-Muslims to be appointed to Waqf boards, infringing on the Muslim community's right to manage its own religious affairs.

 

- Dilutes protections for Waqf properties, including those without documentation or established via oral dedication.

 

- Redefines ‘Waqf’ by removing the concept of ‘Waqf by user,’ a doctrine developed by Indian courts.

 

- Bars Scheduled Tribe members from making a Waqf, which is being seen as a denial of rights.

 

- Facilitates executive control, which critics say opens the door to arbitrary interference by government authorities.

 

- Endangers ancient properties, potentially extinguishing the Waqf status of heritage sites.

 

- Introduces 35 amendments, which petitioners argue weaken the powers of state Waqf boards and aim to convert religious land into government property.

 

Support from seven states; Centre files caveat

 

Meanwhile, seven state governments have expressed support for the central government and have moved the Supreme Court seeking to intervene in favour of the amended Act. These states argue that the law is constitutionally valid, non-discriminatory, and essential to streamline and modernise Waqf administration.

 

In a precautionary step, the Centre has filed a caveat in the Supreme Court, requesting that it be heard before any interim relief is granted.