NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday said it will consider the question of interim relief on May 20 while hearing pleas against the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025.
SC bench led by CJI B R Gavai will consider on May 20 whether interim order is required on three issues: waqf by user , nomination of non-Muslims to waqf council and boards, and identification of government land under waqf.
The case was previously being heard by former Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, who demitted office on May 13.
The Act, notified after receiving President Droupadi Murmu 's assent on April 5, has sparked controversy over key provisions, particularly those concerning waqf by user, the denotification of waqf properties , and the inclusion of non-Muslims in the central waqf council and state waqf Boards .
What happened so far
On April 17, the top court recorded an assurance from the Union government that no waqf properties, including those recognised through long-standing usage ("waqf by user"), would be denotified and no appointments would be made to waqf councils or boards until May 5. This assurance came after the Centre urged the court not to stay the law without hearing its side, noting that the Act had been passed by Parliament following "due deliberations."
Opposing any interim stay, the Centre had earlier objected to the apex court's proposal to freeze key provisions of the Act, arguing that such a move would amount to judicial overreach into legislative powers.
Centre's defence
On April 25, the ministry of minority affairs submitted a 1,332-page affidavit defending the law and calling for dismissal of the petitions. The affidavit strongly rejected demands for a "blanket stay" and claimed there was a "mischievous false narrative" surrounding the amendment.
The government also countered concerns that the inclusion of non-Muslims could dilute the representation of Muslims in waqf institutions. It justified the provision on waqf by user, warning that judicial intervention could result in a “legislative regime by judicial order.”
Interestingly, the Centre flagged a 116 per cent increase in the number of waqf properties recorded since 2013, calling it "shocking" and indirectly suggesting irregularities or manipulation in the waqf records over the years.
SC bench led by CJI B R Gavai will consider on May 20 whether interim order is required on three issues: waqf by user , nomination of non-Muslims to waqf council and boards, and identification of government land under waqf.
The case was previously being heard by former Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, who demitted office on May 13.
The Act, notified after receiving President Droupadi Murmu 's assent on April 5, has sparked controversy over key provisions, particularly those concerning waqf by user, the denotification of waqf properties , and the inclusion of non-Muslims in the central waqf council and state waqf Boards .
What happened so far
On April 17, the top court recorded an assurance from the Union government that no waqf properties, including those recognised through long-standing usage ("waqf by user"), would be denotified and no appointments would be made to waqf councils or boards until May 5. This assurance came after the Centre urged the court not to stay the law without hearing its side, noting that the Act had been passed by Parliament following "due deliberations."
Opposing any interim stay, the Centre had earlier objected to the apex court's proposal to freeze key provisions of the Act, arguing that such a move would amount to judicial overreach into legislative powers.
Centre's defence
On April 25, the ministry of minority affairs submitted a 1,332-page affidavit defending the law and calling for dismissal of the petitions. The affidavit strongly rejected demands for a "blanket stay" and claimed there was a "mischievous false narrative" surrounding the amendment.
The government also countered concerns that the inclusion of non-Muslims could dilute the representation of Muslims in waqf institutions. It justified the provision on waqf by user, warning that judicial intervention could result in a “legislative regime by judicial order.”
Interestingly, the Centre flagged a 116 per cent increase in the number of waqf properties recorded since 2013, calling it "shocking" and indirectly suggesting irregularities or manipulation in the waqf records over the years.
You may also like
Enzo Maresca launches Chelsea review after latest blow in Champions League race
Ukraine LIVE: Zelensky storms off after revealing Putin has not turned up to peace talks
South Africa Cricket Board Reverses Decision, Allows 8 Players to Continue in IPL 2025
Big DA hike coming? Central govt workers eye higher increments
IPL Millionaire Sam Billings Publicly Trolls Babar Azam Over Slow Half-Century in PSL
