New Delhi: The petitions filed in the Supreme Court challenging the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 were mentioned before the Supreme Court on Monday.
A bench headed by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna denied oral mentioning.
The bench asked senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who was mentioning the matter, why the oral mentioning is being made when there is a system in place to seek urgent listing by sending of email and asked him to move a mentioning letter.
When Sibal said that the letter had already been email, CJI said that he would do the needful after examining it this afternoon.
“Why are you mentioning when we have a system in place? Send a letter of urgency and that will be placed before me. I will do the needful. All these requests are placed before me every afternoon,” said the CJI.
Several petitions were filed in the apex court challenging the Act contending that it was discriminatory towards the Muslim community and violates their fundamental rights.
President Droupadi Murmu on April 5, gave her assent to the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025, which was earlier passed by Parliament after heated debates in both Houses.
Congress MP Mohammad Jawed, All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) Member of Parliament Asaduddin Owaisi, AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan, Maulana Arshad Madani, the President of the Islamic cleric’s body Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind, Kerala Sunni scholars’ body Samastha Kerala Jamiatul Ulema, Social Democratic Party of India, and NGO Association for Protection of Civil Rights have already approached the top court against the Act.
In his plea, Javed said that the Act discriminates against the Muslim community by imposing restrictions that are not present in the governance of other religious endowments.
Javed was also a member of the Joint Parliamentary Committee on the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024.
Owaisi in his plea stated that the amended Act “irreversibly dilute” the statutory protections afforded to Waqfs and their regulatory framework while conferring undue advantage upon other stakeholders and interest groups, undermining years of progress and setting back Waqf management by several decades.
Khan’s plea stated that the Act curtails the religious and cultural autonomy of Muslims, enables arbitrary executive interference, and undermines minority rights to manage their religious and charitable institutions.
Samastha Kerala Jamiatul Ulema contended that these amendments would distort the religious character of Waqfs while also irreversibly damaging the democratic process in the administration of Waqf and Waqf Boards.
Madani in his petition challenged various provisions of the Act terming them unconstitutional and destructive to the Waqf administration and jurisprudence in India.
His petition further said that several Waqf properties would be vulnerable due to the mandatory timelines for uploading details on the Portal and Database envisaged under the amendment, threatening the very existence of a large number of historical waqfs–particularly those created by oral dedication or without formal deeds.
The NGO submitted that the Act is not only unnecessary but also an alarming interference into the religious affairs of the Muslim community diluting the fundamental purpose of Waqf, which is a practice deeply rooted in Quranic references.