Supreme Court stays portions of Waqf Amendment Act, rules CEO must be Muslim

On Monday, the Supreme Court delivered its verdict on a plea seeking a stay on the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. While over 100 petitioners denounced the law as a “creeping acquisition” of Muslim properties, the government defended it as an essential measure to curb “widespread encroachment” on both public and private lands.

The bench of Chief Justice of India B R Gavai and Justice A G Masih noted that provisions such as Sections 3(r), 3C, and 14 of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 are invalid, and therefore decided to put them on hold.

The court clarified that the executive cannot determine anyone’s rights. Until a final decision regarding property is taken in revenue records, no changes can be made to the ownership rights of Waqf properties. However, the court also stated that any third-party rights will not be recognised.

Commenting on the structure of Waqf Boards, the Supreme Court held that at the state level, no more than three non-Muslim members can be part of the board. In other words, out of 11 members, Muslim members must remain in the majority. Furthermore, the board’s Chief Executive Officer must be a Muslim.

The court added that this order does not amount to a final recommendation on the legality of the Waqf Act. Provisions related to the registration of Waqf properties remain valid.

Reacting to the Supreme Court order putting a stay on key Waqf (Amendment) Act provisions, Advocate Anas Tanwir told the news agency, “In Section 9, it is stated that not more than four non-members can be non-Muslims and in Section 23, it is mentioned that out of the 11 board members, not more than three can be non-Muslims. Section 23 has not been stayed, but it has been noted that all efforts should be made to appoint the CEO from the Muslim community…”

Maulana Khalid Rashid Firangi Mahali said, “Regarding the Waqf Amendment Act, the Supreme Court has issued an interim order today. We have received significant relief from this interim order. Although our demand was for a stay on the entire law, the relief granted is still substantial. Efforts will continue, as no final direction has been issued yet…”

Moreover, Congress MP Imran Pratapgarhi said, “We are the petitioners and we are happy. But how can the government be happy? A large part of the government’s conspiracy has been stopped and if despite that the government claims to be happy, then it is nothing but stubbornness on their part.”

(With inputs from syndicated feed)