New Delhi, April 17: In a significant development concerning the controversial Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, the Union Government on Thursday assured the Supreme Court that it would not operationalize certain contentious provisions of the newly enacted law — at least for the time being. These include the provision permitting the appointment of non-Muslims to the Central Waqf Council and various State Waqf Boards, as well as clauses related to the de-notification of Waqf properties.
A three-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, along with Justices P. V. Sanjay Kumar and K. V. Viswanathan, recorded the assurance given by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who appeared on behalf of the Centre. The Solicitor General assured the Court that no appointments — especially those involving non-Muslims — to Waqf Boards or the Central Waqf Council would take place, and no registered or notified Waqf properties, including those classified under “Waqf by user,” would be de-notified until the matter is taken up again by the Court.
The Court, acknowledging the government’s stance, allowed the Centre one week’s time to file its detailed counter-affidavit in response to the petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Act. The petitioners, in turn, were granted five additional days to submit their rejoinders. The matter is scheduled for the week beginning May 5, at which point the hearing will primarily focus on directions and consideration of interim relief, if necessary.
During the proceedings, Solicitor General Mehta strongly urged the bench not to impose a stay on the Act, arguing that it was the outcome of extensive public consultation and had been passed by Parliament following receipt of lakhs of representations across the country. “Villages and lands have for long been arbitrarily declared as Waqf. The Act is a thoughtful piece of legislation to address historical ambiguities,” he argued, requesting the Court to refrain from taking what he described as a “harsh step” of staying a duly enacted statute.
Chief Justice Khanna, while acknowledging that the bench had observed both positive aspects and legal infirmities within the law, noted that a delicate balance must be maintained so as not to disturb the prevailing legal and social status quo in a manner that could adversely affect stakeholders. He pointed out the judicial principle that while courts ordinarily do not stay enacted laws, they are equally cautious to ensure that rights are not irreversibly affected while a law’s constitutional validity is under judicial review.
The bench also recorded a crucial submission by the Solicitor General — that if any state government were to go ahead and make appointments to the Waqf Council or Boards in defiance of the Court’s directive, such appointments would be treated as void ab initio.
In a related procedural move, the Court segregated a set of petitions filed by Hindu parties challenging older Waqf legislations from 1995 and 2013, and directed that the case title of the matter be revised as “In Re: Waqf Amendment Act”, focusing attention specifically on the 2025 amendments.
Previously, the apex court had hinted at the possibility of staying certain key provisions of the amended law, including the controversial authority granted to District Collectors to adjudicate Waqf property disputes and the inclusion of non-Muslims in the governance structures of Waqf institutions. The bench had raised serious concerns over the retrospective de-notification of Waqf properties, especially those that were declared Waqf centuries ago — questioning whether the state could “rewrite history” through legislative action.
CJI Khanna observed that many Waqf properties in India fall under the category of “Waqf by user,” which often lack formal documentation or registration, and hence may become vulnerable under the new provisions. The Court was unequivocal in expressing that any sweeping reclassification or nullification of such properties would be legally and socially destabilizing.
Several petitions challenging the Act’s constitutionality have been filed in the Supreme Court by various individuals, parliamentarians, and organisations, including the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM), the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), and others. The petitioners have argued that the amendments are discriminatory in nature, infringe upon the religious and property rights of the Muslim community, and are violative of fundamental constitutional protections.
Despite the legal challenges, the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025, was passed after intense debate in both Houses of Parliament and received Presidential assent from Droupadi Murmu on April 5. Several BJP-led state governments, including those of Rajasthan, Haryana, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Assam, Uttarakhand, and Chhattisgarh, have filed applications supporting the Act, along with numerous civil society groups, particularly those advocating for Hindu and tribal rights.
As the Supreme Court prepares to hear the matter substantively in May, the interim assurance from the Centre has temporarily allayed some fears of immediate administrative or legal changes stemming from the Act. However, the final outcome of the case could have far-reaching implications on the structure, autonomy, and legal protections surrounding Waqf institutions across India.