The Central government on Friday strongly defended the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 in the Supreme Court, urging the court not to impose a blanket or partial stay on a law that carries the presumption of constitutionality.
The Centre filed a comprehensive 1,332-page affidavit asserting that the amended law is a valid exercise of legislative power passed by Parliament and addresses misinformation and misinterpretation surrounding its provisions.
The affidavit was submitted in response to several petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the new amendments to the Waqf Act.
The government contended that the pleas were based on a “mischievous false narrative” and warned that an interim order interfering with the law could lead to unintended consequences, including for members of the Muslim community.
Centre Warns Against Judicial Overreach
The government cautioned the Supreme Court against issuing any stay that might, even temporarily, override legislation enacted by Parliament.
Such action, it said, would set a precedent for creating a legislative regime by judicial intervention, especially at an interim stage.
“There exists a well-established legal principle that laws passed by Parliament are presumed to be constitutional until proven otherwise,” the affidavit argued.
Referring to the upcoming hearing on May 5, the Centre requested the bench led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna to refrain from issuing any interim relief or directions that may stall the enforcement of the Act.
Surge in Waqf Properties Since 2013
One of the key points raised by the government was a “shocking” 116% increase in waqf properties since 2013. The total land under waqf before 2013, from the Mughal era through post-independence, stood at approximately 18.29 lakh acres.
This figure has since surged to over 20.92 lakh acres, raising concerns about unregulated expansion and alleged misuse of waqf laws to encroach upon private and government land.
Controversy Over “Waqf by User”
The affidavit also addressed the contentious issue of “waqf by user”—a provision allowing unregistered religious properties used by the community to be treated as waqf.
The Centre defended the April 8 registration deadline for such properties, asserting that any judicial interference with this requirement would undermine the law and create legal inconsistencies.
“If such sections are diluted through interim court orders, it would essentially invalidate the legislative intent and introduce a regime Parliament consciously decided against,” the affidavit noted.
Muslim Representation in Waqf Bodies
In response to concerns raised about potential underrepresentation of Muslims in the Central Waqf Council and state boards due to the inclusion of non-Muslims, the Centre clarified the composition rules. It stated that only four of the 22 members in the Central Waqf Council could be non-Muslims. At the state level, a maximum of three non-Muslim members could be present in 11-member boards, depending on whether ex-officio members happen to be non-Muslims.
The Centre rejected claims that these changes would sideline Muslims or dilute their control over waqf institutions, maintaining that the reforms aim to improve transparency and accountability.
Amendments Aim at Reform, Not Religion
The government insisted that the new law does not interfere with religious practices but merely regulates the secular and administrative aspects of waqf management, which fall well within Parliament’s jurisdiction. The amendment, it argued, enhances judicial oversight, ensures fair governance of waqf assets, and protects the rights of all stakeholders involved.
It stressed that the legislation upholds constitutional values, respects religious freedom, and aims to manage religious endowments in a way that honours the trust of the community while preventing misuse.
“The Amendment Act brings in judicial accountability, transparency, and fairness to waqf management,” the affidavit stated.
Assurance to the Supreme Court
During a prior hearing on April 17, the government had already assured the top court that it would not denotify waqf properties, including those categorised as “waqf by user”, nor make appointments to the Central Waqf Council or state boards until May 5, the date of the next hearing.
The Centre concluded its affidavit by reiterating that any interim relief at this stage would amount to a judicial overreach and urged the court to dismiss the petitions challenging the Act’s validity.
