The Supreme Court on Thursday recorded a statement by the Union government that waqfs, including waqfs-by-user, whether declared by way of notification or through registration, will neither be denotified nor suffer any change in character until the next date of court hearing.

A three-judge Bench, headed by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, also recorded in its order an assurance by the Centre, represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, that no appointments would be made to the Central Waqf Council or the State Waqf Boards under the amended Sections 9 and 14 of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, which allowed the inclusion of non-Muslims, till the court takes up the matter again.

The Bench has fixed the next hearing in the week commencing on May 5.

Seven days’ time

Mehta successfully urged the court to grant him seven days to file a response covering the entire gamut of 100 years of legislation on the issue and numerous representations received from across the country which led to the framing of the provisions, introduction and passage in Parliament of the 2025 Act.

The Solicitor General said the court must not stay the provisions of the Act, indirectly or directly, on a “prima facie or tentative reading” of certain sections.

“As the Solicitor General, appearing for the Union of India, I am saying that we, as a government and as a Parliament, are answerable to the people. We received lakhs and lakhs of representations which resulted in the making of these provisions. For example, villages and villages are taken as waqfs, private properties of individuals are taken as waqfs. This is a considered piece of legislation. This involves a large number of innocent people’s right to land and property… We will have to take you through the history of the legislation through a 100 years,” Mehta urged the court against passing an interim order.

The law officer said any interim order of stay of the 2025 Act, directly or indirectly or even partly, at this preliminary stage would not only be a rare measure but also a “serious and harsh step” taken by the court without availing of any “complete assistance”. He said the government must be allowed by the court to place documents, statutes and reports that led to the passing of the Act. Chief Justice Khanna said the court wanted to prevent any drastic changes in the current situation while seized of the case. The CJI agreed that the situation regarding waqfs, prior to the new law, had infirmities. The 2025 Act did have “certain positive things”. The court had on April 16 refused a request from the petitioners’ side for a complete stay of the Act.

“But at the same time we do not want the situation, whatever situation prevailing today, to change drastically that it affects a lot of people,” Chief Justice Khanna explained.

‘Maintain status quo’

The top judge pointed out that the court, while mulling an interim order on April 16, had not thought of intervening in a particular amendment requiring a person to have been a practising Muslim for five years prior to dedicating his property as waqf.

“And you are right, we do not stay legislation at the preliminary stage. That is the thumb rule. At the same time, there is also a thumb rule that normally when a matter is pending before this court, the situation as is prevailing today should continue so as not to affect the rights of the parties… We do not want the position to be changed,” the CJI pointed out.

Mehta said the concern of the government was that the court should not be blamed for judicial overreach.

“There is no question of overreach. The Parliament legislates, The Executive implements and the Judiciary adjudicates. It is clear,” Chief Justice corrected the notion.

Senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, for one of the respondents supporting the legislation, said the Parliament did nothing but legislate the will of the people.

Mehta assured the court “nothing would happen even if the government wants to” until the next hearing. But the Chief Justice said the appointments to the Waqf Boards were not in the hands of the Centre.

“If, before the court hears this case, if any State, not represented here, makes any appointments, it may be treated as void,” Mehta submitted.

Senior advocate Ravindra Shrivastava, for the Waqf Board of Chhattisgarh, said his client was supporting the legislation. He said the term of the Board stretched to 2027.

“I am sure there will be Muslim organisations supporting the legislation, likewise there would be Hindus not supporting,” said Chief Justice Khanna.

Mehta said the debate on the legislation was not divided by religion.

Published on April 17, 2025