Supreme Court Hears Writ Petitions Challenging Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 as Ultra Vires Constitution; Interim Assurance Recorded Against Appointments and De-notification. Petitioners argued that de-recognition of Waqf by user, special provision for Government property under Section 3C, and non-Muslim majority in Waqf bodies under Sections 9 and 14 violate Articles 14, 15, 25, 26 of Constitution.

Writ petitions under civil original jurisdiction challenging the constitutional validity of several provisions of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 as ultra vires the Constitution of India.

Petitioners sought declaration that the impugned provisions are unconstitutional and interim relief, including stay on implementation; earlier Bench recorded assurance of Solicitor General regarding no appointments and no de-notification.

The impugned Act allegedly aims to take away or expropriate Waqf properties, de-recognise Waqf by user prospectively, permit Government to claim Waqf properties through arbitrary inquiry, and alter composition of Waqf bodies to enable non-Muslim majority, violating fundamental rights of Muslims.

An earlier Bench presided over by then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna on 17 April 2025 recorded a statement of the Solicitor General assuring that no appointments would be made to Central Waqf Council and State Waqf Boards under Sections 9 and 14, and no Waqf, including Waqf by user, would be de-notified or its status changed till next date of hearing.

Whether Section 3(r) of the Amended Waqf Act de-recognising Waqf by user prospectively is unconstitutional. Whether the special provision for Government properties under Section 3C of the Amended Waqf Act is arbitrary and violative of constitutional rights. Whether changes in composition of Central Waqf Council and State Waqf Board under Sections 9 and 14 of the Amended Waqf Act violate religious freedom and minority rights. Whether Section 3D of the Amended Waqf Act relating to protected monuments infringes right to religious practices under Articles 25 and 26. Whether Section 3E of the Amended Waqf Act restricting Scheduled Tribes members from declaring land as Waqf property violates religious freedom. Whether Section 23 of the Amended Waqf Act removing requirement of Muslim CEO and changing mode of constitution from election to nomination is unconstitutional.

Petitioners argued that though the impugned Act claimed to protect Waqfs, its real intention was to take away or expropriate Waqf properties; registration was not mandatory under prior laws and non-compliance only led to removal of Mutawalli (Paras 7-8). Petitioners contended that the requirement to show or demonstrate practising Islam for at least five years for declaring property as Waqf under Section 4(ix)(a) is discriminatory and arbitrary, violating Articles 14, 15, 19, 21, 25 and 26 (Para 10). Petitioners submitted that Section 3C of the Amended Waqf Act allows designated officer above rank of Collector to conduct inquiry without detailed guidelines and the proviso to sub-section (2) changes status of property to Government property even before report, leaving Waqf only remedy before Tribunal (Paras 15-16). Petitioners argued that amendments to Sections 9 and 14 enable non-Muslim majority in Central Waqf Council and State Waqf Boards, permitting interference in Muslim management of religious affairs (Paras 12-13). Petitioners challenged Section 3D of the Amended Waqf Act, contending that notification of a monument as protected monument voids Waqf declarations and infringes right to continue religious practices, violating Articles 14, 15, 25 and 26 (Para 9). Petitioners contended that Section 3E of the Amended Waqf Act is a direct attack on religious freedom of Scheduled Tribes members practising Islam who desire to donate properties for creation of Waqf (Para 11). Petitioners submitted that Section 23 of the Amended Waqf Act removes requirement of Muslim Chief Executive Officer and changes mode of constituting Board from election to nomination by Government, affecting independent management of Waqfs (Para 14).

He assures this Court that till the next date of hearing, no appointments would be made to the Central Waqf Council and the Waqf Boards in the States and the National Capital Territory of Delhi, under Sections 9 and 14 respectively of the principal Act, that is, the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act, 1995, as amended by the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. He further states that if the Government of any State or the National Capital Territory of Delhi makes any such appointment(s), the same may be declared void. It is also stated that till the next date of hearing, no Waqf, including a Waqf by user, whether declared by way of notification or by way of registration, shall be de-notified, nor will their character or status be changed. though the impugned Act says that it has been enacted to “protect” Waqfs, but the real intention behind it is to take away or expropriate the Waqf properties. under Section 9 of the Amended Waqf Act, which pertains to the establishment and constitution of Central Waqf Council, out of 22 members, 12 members could be non-Muslims, thereby leaving space only for 10 Muslims in the Council. Similarly, under Section 14 of the Amended Waqf Act which pertains to composition of the Board for a State and the National Capital Territory of Delhi, it is submitted that out of 11 members, 7 members could be non-Muslims, again enabling a majority of non-Muslims to manage the affairs of the Waqf.

Multiple writ petitions were filed in the Supreme Court of India under civil original jurisdiction challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. The first five writ petitions, being Writ Petition (Civil) Nos. 276, 314, 284, 331 and 269 of 2025, challenged several sections as ultra vires. An earlier Bench presided over by then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna heard the matter on 17 April 2025 and recorded a statement of the Solicitor General regarding no appointments and no de-notification. Subsequently, the present Bench presided over by Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai heard extensive submissions from Senior Counsel for petitioners and respondent Union of India. The extracted judgment text ends during the petitioners' submissions, before the discussion and analysis section.

• Constitution of India: Article 14, Article 15, Article 19, Article 21, Article 25, Article 26, Article 29, Article 30, Article 300A
• Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025: Section 4(ix)(a), Section 4(ix)(b), Section 4(ix)(e), Section 5, Section 10, Section 12, Section 16, Section 21, Section 43, Section 44, Section 45
• Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act, 1995: Section 3(r), Section 3C, Section 3D, Section 3E, Section 3(fa), Section 3(fb), Section 9, Section 14, Section 23, Section 36, Section 83, Section 104, Section 107, Section 108, Section 108A
• Mussalman Wakf Act, 1923:
• Bengal Wakf Act, 1934:
• Wakf Act, 1954:
• Wakf (Amendment) Act, 1984: