WILL THE WAQF LAW USHER IN TRANSPARENCY?

THE CONTEXT: President Droupadi Murmu has assented to the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025, after both Houses of Parliament passed it. They fund charitable activities, maintain places of worship, and support educational institutions. Any legislative change affecting waqf management thus has far-reaching implications for religious freedom, minority rights, and the broader constitutional framework.

CONSTITUTIONAL AND LEGAL BACKGROUND:

1. Concept of Waqf:

• • Rooted in Islamic law, a waqf is a property dedicated for religious or charitable purposes in perpetuity. Once declared a waqf, it becomes inalienable—it cannot be sold, gifted, or inherited.

 

2. Evolution of Indian Waqf Laws:

• • Waqf Act, 1954: One of the earliest post-Independence legislations to systematically regulate waqf properties.
  • Waqf Act, 1995: Reorganised and consolidated waqf administration across the country, establishing State Waqf Boards and the Central Waqf Council.
  • 2013 Amendments: Introduced changes to strengthen the dispute resolution mechanism and enhance the regulatory framework under the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government.

 

3. Constitutional Provisions:

• • Article 26 (Freedom to manage religious affairs): Allows religious denominations to establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes.
  • Article 14 (Right to Equality): Prohibits arbitrary or discriminatory laws. The Bill’s provisions must be consistent with these fundamental principles.
  • Article 25 (Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice, and propagation of religion): Governs an individual’s right to profess and practise religion.

KEY FEATURES OF THE WAQF (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2025:

1. Renaming of the Principal Act:

• • The Waqf Act, 1995, is now titled the “Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act.”
  • This renaming indicates a broader scope and a more centralised approach to waqf administration.

 

2. Restriction on Creating Waqf:

• • The new law mandates that only persons who have practised Islam for at least five years can dedicate property as waqf.
  • Critics argue that this provision discriminates against recent converts to Islam, potentially violating Articles 14 and 25 of the Constitution.

 

3. Partial Retention of ‘Waqf by User’:

• • Initial Proposal: Complete repeal of the ‘waqf by user’ doctrine, which recognised properties as waqf based on uninterrupted communal use.
  • Final Provision: Existing ‘waqf by user’ properties remain valid unless disputed or classified as government land, but future new claims under this doctrine are barred.

 

4. Enhanced Government Oversight:

• • Survey Mechanism: Survey responsibilities shift from specialised commissioners to officers above the rank of District Collector.
  • Repeal of Section 40: Waqf Boards lose the power to initiate suo motu inquiries on whether a property is waqf in the absence of formal documentation.

 

5. Inclusion of Non-Muslims in Waqf Boards:

• • Mandates at least two non-Muslim members in State Waqf Boards and the Central Waqf Council.
  • Removes the requirement for the Chief Executive Officer of a Waqf Board to be a Muslim.

 

6. Centralised Registration Portal:

• • Introduces a centralised system where all waqf properties must be registered within six months, aiming to curb encroachment and corruption.

 

7. Repeal of Section 107 of the 1995 Act:

• • Ends the exemption of waqf properties from the Limitation Act, 1963, potentially enabling illegal occupiers to claim adverse possession if encroachment has existed for 12 years or more.

MAJOR ISSUES AND DEBATES:

1. Discrimination Concerns:

• • Eligibility Clause: Requiring five years of Islamic practice for new waqf dedications may violate the right to equality (Article 14) and freedom of religion (Article 25).
  • Non-Muslim Representation: While some see it as a step towards inclusivity, others argue it encroaches on the Muslim community’s right to manage religious affairs.

 

2. Autonomy of Waqf Boards:

• • Government-appointed officers in Waqf Boards could lead to politicisation and undermine the boards’ independence.
  • The shift from specialised survey commissioners to generalist District Collectors adds administrative burden and dilutes domain expertise.

 

3. Encroachment and Adverse Possession:

• • With Section 107 repealed, encroached properties may become unrecoverable if occupiers can prove long-term possession.
  • This raises questions on how effectively the new law will protect waqf lands.

 

4. Judicial Scrutiny:

• • Multiple petitions (by MPs, NGOs) challenging the Bill’s constitutionality before the Supreme Court.
  • Courts generally lean towards upholding legislative enactments unless clear constitutional violations are established.

IMPLICATIONS FOR GOVERNANCE AND POLICY:

1. Transparency vs. Autonomy:

• • Centralised registration and mandatory disclosures could improve accountability but also increase state intervention in religious affairs.

 

2. Impact on Socio-Economic Welfare:

• • Waqf properties fund educational institutions (including madrassas), support the poor, and maintain religious infrastructure.
  • Excessive regulation or bureaucratic hurdles could disrupt these welfare activities.

 

3. Scope for Uniform Framework:

• • Debate emerges on why similar reforms are not being considered for other religious endowments, such as temple boards or trusts of other faiths.

 

4. Administrative Efficiency:

• • Digitisation through a central portal might reduce corruption if managed effectively.
  • However, District Collectors are overburdened, risking perfunctory surveys.

CHALLENGES IN IMPLEMENTATION:

1. Enforcement Mechanism:

• • States may differ in enforcement capacity. Coordination between Central and State authorities is critical.
  • Survey processes could stall if District Collectors lack specialised training or resources.

 

2. Political Influences:

• • Politically-appointed Waqf Board members might prioritise patronage over transparency.
  • Risk of communal tensions if reforms are perceived as targeting the Muslim community’s autonomy.

 

3. Legal Hurdles and Litigations:

• • The Bill is likely to face prolonged legal challenges in the Supreme Court and High Courts, delaying full-scale implementation.

SIGNIFICANCE AND OPPORTUNITIES:

1. Potential for Enhanced Accountability:

• • If carefully executed, digitisation and stricter oversight can combat large-scale encroachment and revenue leakages.
  • Greater transparency in property listings may improve waqf-related dispute resolution.

 

2. Community Participation:

• • The Bill could become a catalyst for broader participation of diverse groups (including women, OBCs, and non-Muslims) in waqf administration.
  • Engaging local stakeholders can promote community-driven management practices.

 

3. Synergy with Other Welfare Schemes:

• • Effective management of waqf properties could complement government welfare schemes for minorities, elevating education, health, and livelihood outcomes.

THE WAY FORWARD:

BALANCING STATE INTERVENTION AND RELIGIOUS AUTONOMY

1. Consultative Law-Making

• • Rationale: Striking the right balance between oversight and religious autonomy requires an inclusive dialogue among Waqf Boards, scholars (e.g., from institutions like Aligarh Muslim University), civil society, and Ministry of Minority Affairs.

 

2. Multi-Stakeholder Oversight

1. • Instead of complete government dominance, create a hybrid supervisory council with judicial, administrative, and community representation.
   • The representation of diverse stakeholders can uphold constitutional guarantees and foster trust in regulatory mechanisms.

UNIFORM GUIDELINES ACROSS FAITHS

1. Pan-Faith Regulatory Framework

• • Address concerns of selective regulation by exploring similar standards for Hindu temple trusts, Sikh gurdwara committees, Christian church trusts, etc.
  • Sachar Committee Perspective: Recommended that all religious endowments be leveraged for community welfare, emphasising uniform norms in record-keeping and financial audits.
  • Kerala Devaswom Board (Hindu temple board) has digitised assets and enforced transparency measures—these successes can be adapted to waqf management.

 

2. National Endowment Regulatory Authority (NERA)

• • Create an overarching body—modeled somewhat on the Charity Commission in the UK—that standardises management protocols for all religious trusts.

BUILDING INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY

1. Specialised Training for District Collectors and Officials

• • Transferring survey responsibilities from dedicated commissioners to District Collectors could dilute expertise unless backed by structured training.
  • India has over 6 lakh waqf properties (as per WAMSI), demanding trained personnel to handle large-scale digitisation and verification.
  • Mission Karmayogi (Central government initiative for civil services) can incorporate modules on waqf law, property rights, and conflict resolution.

 

2. Strengthening Local Waqf Boards

• • Tamil Nadu Waqf Board successfully collaborated with local panchayats and NGOs to preserve encroached properties after officials underwent targeted capacity-building.

STRENGTHENING THE CENTRAL WAQF COUNCIL

1. Technical and Dispute Resolution Expertise

• • The Central Waqf Council should have domain experts (lawyers, urban planners, auditors) to guide State Boards on surveying techniques and legal challenges.
  • Include GIS mapping specialists to mark waqf boundaries accurately, reducing litigation stemming from ambiguous records.

 

2. Digitisation and E-Governance

1. • Integrate waqf property records into broader e-governance platforms like the Digital India Land Records Modernization Programme (DILRMP).

LEGAL SAFEGUARDS FOR WAQF PROPERTIES

1. Revisiting the Adverse Possession Clause

• • Repeal of Section 107 (exempting waqf lands from the Limitation Act) risks legitimising encroachments.
  • Incorporate a special waiver for religious/charitable land, akin to provisions for forest lands or public utilities, so genuine charitable endowments remain protected.
  • Malaysia has robust laws preventing religious land from falling into private hands via adverse possession, ensuring continuous religious usage.

 

2. Judicial Mechanisms and Tribunals

• • Fast-track waqf tribunals at state level—staffed with retired judges and domain experts—for quicker resolution of disputes.

• • • Andhra Pradesh Waqf Tribunal disposed of 75% of backlog cases within two years when given dedicated infrastructure and domain-specialised staff.

FUTURE RESEARCH AND DIALOGUE:

1. Socio-Economic Impact Studies

• • Independent research (by institutions like NITI Aayog or ICSSR) can quantify waqf contribution to education, healthcare, and poverty alleviation.
  • Sachar Committee Lesson: Demonstrated that a lack of data on minority welfare leads to suboptimal policymaking; similar data-driven insight is essential now.

 

2. Continuous Legislative Oversight

• • Mandate biannual or annual parliamentary and state assembly reviews of waqf administration.
  • The UK House of Commons routinely reviews charity commissions for transparency—India can replicate such oversight for the Central Waqf Council and State Waqf Boards.

THE CONCLUSION:

To harmonize governance efficiency with minority rights, India must pioneer a Waqf Development Corporation leveraging underutilized ₹65,000 crore assets for affordable housing and skill centers while instituting cross-religious audits to ensure equitable secularism. This dual approach would transform waqf reforms into a global model of pluralistic empowerment anchored in constitutional ethos. Future policies must prioritize algorithmic transparency in land dispute resolution and mandate parallel reforms for Hindu endowments, ensuring state interventions uplift marginalized communities without replicating colonial-era majoritarian paradigms.

UPSC PAST YEAR QUESTION:

Q. Discuss the possible factors that inhibit India from enacting for its citizens a uniform civil code as provided for in the Directive Principles of State Policy. 2015

MAINS PRACTICE QUESTION:

Q. The Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025 has sparked a debate on balancing state oversight with religious autonomy. Analyze the key provisions of this Bill in light of India’s constitutional guarantees for minority rights.

SOURCE:

https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/will-the-waqf-law-usher-in-transparency/article69417655.ece

Spread the Word