On Friday, the Supreme Court declined to examine new petitions contesting the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, remarking that many aim for media attention. A bench led by Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih indicated it would address the pending matter on May 20, focusing on the interim relief aspect.
During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, argued against an “endless” stream of petitions challenging the Act. The petitioner’s counsel mentioned that he submitted his petition on April 8 and rectified the issues identified by the apex court registry by April 15, yet it remained unlisted for hearing. The Chief Justice noted, “Everybody wants his name to be in the newspapers,” displaying skepticism toward the motives behind the numerous petitions.
When the petitioner requested that his plea be grouped with the existing ones, the bench replied, “We will decide that matter,” subsequently dismissing it. A similar request from another petitioner was also dismissed swiftly. The CJI remarked, “We already have too many intervenors,” when approached to allow another petitioner to join the ongoing cases.
Earlier, on April 17, the Supreme Court opted to hear only five out of the numerous petitions before it. The ongoing challenge against the Waqf Act was slated for further discussion on May 15, before the same bench. Thus, the Supreme Court is consolidating its approach to handle the multiple pleas challenging the Act efficiently.
The bench has scheduled to hear arguments on May 20 regarding interim directions on three significant issues concerning waqf properties. These issues include the authority to denotify properties classified as waqf by courts, waqf-by-user, or waqf by deed. The second issue raised by petitioners pertains to the composition of state waqf boards and the Central Waqf Council, where they assert that only Muslims, excluding ex-officio members, should participate. The third issue addresses a provision stating that a property will not be recognized as waqf if the collector determines through inquiry that it belongs to the government.
On April 17, the Centre assured the Supreme Court that it would refrain from denotifying waqf properties, including those recognized as waqf by user, and would not make appointments to the central waqf council and boards until May 5. On May 15, Mehta informed the apex court that the Centre had previously assured that no waqf properties, including those established via waqf by user, would be denotified.
The Centre has opposed the apex court’s suggestion to issue an interim order against the denotification of waqf properties, including waqf by user, and to halt the inclusion of non-Muslims in the central waqf councils and boards. On April 25, the Union Ministry of Minority Affairs submitted a comprehensive 1,332-page affidavit defending the amended Waqf Act of 2025 and opposed any “blanket stay” imposed by the court on a “law having presumption of constitutionality passed by Parliament.”
On Friday, the Supreme Court declined to consider new petitions questioning the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. A bench led by Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih noted that many individuals seem eager to gain media attention through these filings. The Court indicated that it would address the pending matter during the scheduled hearing on May 20 and would focus on the issue of interim relief at that time.
During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, opposed the continuous submission of pleas against the Act, stating that there shouldn’t be an “endless” stream of challenges. One petitioner explained that he had submitted his case on April 8 and rectified the issues raised by the apex court registry by April 15, yet his petition had not been scheduled for a hearing. Chief Justice Gavai remarked on the tendency for individuals to seek publicity.
When the petitioner asked for his case to be combined with the existing petitions, the bench replied that they would resolve the matter as planned, subsequently dismissing it. Another similar plea was also dismissed without further consideration. A request from the petitioner to join the ongoing proceedings was met with the Chief Justice’s comment that the court already had “too many intervenors.” On April 17, the Supreme Court had decided to limit its focus to just five of the numerous petitions submitted regarding the Act. The discussions were slated to resume on May 15 before the bench comprising the Chief Justice and Justice Masih.
The bench announced it would hear arguments on May 20 concerning interim directions on three key issues regarding waqf properties. The first issue pertains to the authority to denotify properties that have been declared as waqf by courts, waqf-by-user, or waqf by deed. The second issue raised by petitioners involves the composition of state waqf boards and the Central Waqf Council, asserting that only Muslims should operate these organizations, except for ex-officio members. The third issue concerns a provision stating that a waqf property will not be classified as waqf if the collector finds it to be government land following an inquiry.
On April 17, the Centre guaranteed the Supreme Court that it would refrain from denotifying waqf properties, including those classified as waqf by user or appointing members to the central waqf council and boards until May 5. Counsel Mehta informed the apex court on May 15 that the Centre’s assurance of not denotifying waqf properties still stands. The Centre opposed the Supreme Court’s suggestion to issue an interim order to halt the denotification of waqf properties, particularly those identified as waqf by user, and to prevent the inclusion of non-Muslims in the councils and boards. On April 25, the Union Ministry of Minority Affairs submitted a preliminary 1,332-page affidavit supporting the amended Waqf Act of 2025 and contested any form of “blanket stay” by the court on a law presumed to be constitutional, having been passed by Parliament.
