Note4Students
UPSC loves questions where law and society collide—especially when the Constitution, property rights, and minority institutions intersect. This article takes a complex issue—the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025—and makes it understandable. In past Mains papers, like the 2016 question on the 69th Amendment and Delhi’s federal tensions, UPSC has tested how well aspirants can balance law, politics, and constitutional principles. Waqf reform fits that pattern. But here’s where aspirants often falter: they either focus too much on faith and ignore Article 300A and due process (“The Overlooked Right to Property”), or they go too technical and miss the larger governance debates (“Secular Implications of the Waqf Act”). This article solves that by taking specific subheads—like how the burden of proof is shifted to Waqf Boards, or how the eligibility to donate now requires 5 years of religious adherence—and explains what they mean for property rights and state accountability. One very special feature of this article is its side-by-side comparison of the Sachar Committee and the JPC recommendations. That’s gold for Mains answers—it shows the evolution of policy thinking (“Comparative Assessment of Sachar Committee and JPC Recommendations”). It’s rare to find both depth and simplicity in one piece. This one does it—with examples, structure, and a direct link to how the UPSC frames its questions.
This article explains the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, where property rights, minority institutions, and constitutional principles meet. UPSC often frames such themes, as seen in the 2016 Mains question on Delhi’s federal structure. Waqf reform fits this pattern. Aspirants often miss the balance—focusing only on religion and overlooking Article 300A, or going too technical and missing governance issues. This article helps bridge that gap. It covers key changes like the burden of proof shifting to Waqf Boards and new donation rules based on five years of religious adherence. A key highlight is its comparison of the Sachar Committee and JPC reports, offering policy depth and helping you frame well-rounded answers for both law and governance questions.
PYQ ANCHORING:
- Discuss the essentials of the 69th Constitutional Amendment Act and anoma lies, if any that have led to recent reported conflicts between the elected repre sentatives and the institution of the Lieutenant Governor in the administration of Delhi. Do you think that this will give rise to a new trend in the functioning of the Indian federal politics? [2016]
MICROTHEMES: Center-State Relations
“Once a property is given to Allah, it can never be taken back.”That’s not just faith—it’s law. In India, this belief governs over 8.7 lakh Waqf properties, making the Waqf Boards one of the country’s largest landowners. But what happens when this spiritual permanence meets legal loopholes, unchecked power, and rising communal unease? From municipal buildings to entire villages being claimed as Waqf, the system has triggered protests, litigation, and a burning question: Can religious endowments coexist with democratic accountability?
The Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025 promises reform—but has opened a fresh Pandora’s box.
Is this course correction—or quiet control? Let’s unpack what’s changing—and why it matters more than ever.
Eligibility to Donate to Waqf Under the New Law:
Only practicing Muslims who have been adhering to their faith for at least five years are eligible to donate property as Waqf under the 2025 Amendment. This reinstates a pre-2013 rule aimed at ensuring genuine and voluntary contributions.
Current Status of Waqf Properties in India
- Registered Properties: As of March 2025, approximately 8.72 lakh Waqf properties are registered across India, covering over 38 lakh acres of land.
Eg: Uttar Pradesh has around 2.1 lakh Waqf properties, West Bengal about 78,000, and Kerala around 55,000. - Urban and Rural Distribution: Waqf properties are located in both prime urban and fertile rural areas but face encroachment and mismanagement.
Eg: In cities like Delhi and Mumbai, Waqf land in commercial hubs remains underutilized or illegally occupied. - Economic Potential: As per government estimates, if properly developed and leased, Waqf properties could generate annual revenues exceeding ₹12,000 crore.
- Digitalisation Progress: Under the ‘Waqf Management System of India (WAMSI)’ project, over 6 lakh properties have been digitised, but real-time land use data remains incomplete.
- Litigation Overload: Thousands of Waqf properties are entangled in long-pending legal disputes, clogging courts and undermining revenue generation.
The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 strives to address the property rights concerns and increase transparency in how Waqf properties are managed and declared.
Key Changes the 2025 Act Tries to Make://DOMINATE PRELIMS
| Concern | Old Waqf Act (1995) | Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 |
| No notice to current landowners | Waqf Boards could declare land as Waqf without notifying the landowner. | Mandatory prior notice and public hearing before a property is registered as Waqf. |
| No time limit for Waqf claims | Land could be declared Waqf decades later, even if private people lived or owned it legally. | Time bar introduced—claims must be made within a set period from property listing or dispute. |
| Burden of proof | Property owner had to prove it was not Waqf, even if they had legal papers. | Burden of proof now shifted to Waqf Boards to justify the Waqf claim with proper documentation. |
| No appeal mechanism | Limited legal remedies. Tribunals were often seen as biased or unresponsive. | Independent grievance redressal forum or appellate authority proposed for fair hearings. |
| Land records mismatch | Many properties were marked Waqf without being in official land records. | Proposed integration with official land registries and local government records. |
Comparative Assessment of Sachar Committee and JPC Recommendations on Waqf Administration Reforms// SMASH MAINS
Over the years, multiple expert bodies have evaluated the challenges facing Waqf property management in India. Two of the most prominent among them—the Sachar Committee (2006) and the Joint Parliamentary Committee (2008)—offered distinct but complementary recommendations:
| Sachar Committee (2006) | Joint Parliamentary Committee (2008) |
| Emphasized efficient utilization of Waqf properties for community welfare | Focused on structural and punitive reforms |
| Advocated regulation and accountability of Mutawallis | Demanded stringent punishment for mismanagement by Mutawallis |
| Called for digitization and systematic record-keeping of Waqf properties | Urged complete computerization of Waqf Boards |
| Recommended inclusion of non-Muslim technical experts | Recommended inclusion of Shia community representation |
| Proposed two women members in both Central and State Waqf Boards | Proposed senior-level officers (IAS or equivalent) as CEOs of State Boards |
| Suggested Joint Secretary-level officers be appointed to Waqf Boards | Suggested Writ Jurisdiction in High Courts for select matters |
| Urged financial audits by CAG or equivalent auditing authority |
The Overlooked Right to Property: Reclaiming Article 300A in the Waqf Debate
The Waqf Act allows Muslims to dedicate property for religious or charitable use—like mosques or madrasas—after which it becomes inalienable and is managed by government-backed Waqf Boards.
The controversy lies in Waqf Boards declaring land as Waqf without informing legal owners. Many discover their property is listed in Waqf records years later, despite having valid documents and long-term possession.
This practice clashes with Article 300A of the Constitution, which protects the right to property. The law’s earlier version didn’t require notice or consent, violating due process and natural justice. At its core, this is not a religious issue—it’s about transparency, legal ownership, and fair procedure. No authority—religious or otherwise—should bypass these principles.
- Constitutional Shift Post-1978: After the 44th Constitutional Amendment, the Right to Property was removed from the list of fundamental rights and placed under Article 300A, making it a constitutional right—still enforceable against arbitrary State action.
- Unilateral Powers under Pre-2025 Waqf Law: The Waqf Act, 1995 allowed Boards to declare land as Waqf without notifying current owners or verifying titles, especially under the provision of “Waqf by user”, raising serious concerns about due process violations.
- Article 300A Requires Procedural Fairness: The Supreme Court has held in several cases (e.g., Bishan Dayal v. State of U.P.) that any deprivation of property must follow a valid legal process, including notice, hearing, and compensation where applicable.
- Judicial Pushback in High Courts: In cases from Delhi, Tamil Nadu, and Haryana, courts have stayed Waqf Board land claims where ownership was contested or where declarations were made without legal scrutiny.
- The 2025 Amendment’s Course Correction: By removing the Waqf Board’s unilateral powers and requiring ownership verification, inheritance settlement, and due process, the Amendment helps align Waqf law with Article 300A protections.
- Balancing Faith and Property Rights: The reforms reflect a shift from faith-based presumptions to constitutionally sound legal procedures, ensuring that religious endowment systems do not override individual rights and public interest.
Secular Implications Of The Waqf Act
The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 has reignited debates about the nature of secularism in India. While the original Waqf Act, 2013 aimed to manage Muslim religious endowments, the new amendment brings significant changes—ranging from restrictions on who can create Waqf, to inclusion of non-Muslims in decision-making, to better legal safeguards and gender justice. These changes are seen by some as a step towards a more transparent and accountable system aligned with constitutional values. Others, however, argue that the bill dilutes religious autonomy and risks over-secularizing a faith-based institution. The table below explores both sides of this ongoing debate through key aspects of the legislation.
| Parameter | Supports Secularism | Goes Against Secularism |
| Who can create Waqf | Earlier, anyone (including non-Muslims) could create Waqf. The new rule limiting it to practicing Muslims ensures religious autonomy and prevents misuse. | Limiting Waqf creation to only Muslims makes it a religiously exclusive institution, which goes against India’s secular idea of equal religious participation. |
| Inclusion of non-Muslims in Waqf Boards | Mandating at least 2 non-Muslim members promotes inclusivity and ensures Waqf affairs are not run in isolation. | Including non-Muslims in a religious body might interfere with internal religious matters, possibly violating the right to religious self-governance. |
| Waqf Board’s power to declare property | Removing the Board’s unilateral power and requiring due process ensures justice, protects property rights, and aligns with secular legal standards. | It may be seen as interfering with religious institutions, especially if Waqf claims are now harder to assert, which some may view as targeting Muslim religious endowments. |
| Women’s inheritance in family Waqf | Clarifying that women must get their due inheritance before any Waqf declaration protects gender rights, in line with constitutional values. | Some conservative voices may argue this overrides religious customs, affecting the religious freedom of Muslims to manage property within their own traditions. |
| Composition of Waqf Tribunals | Requiring a judge, bureaucrat, and Muslim law expert makes the body balanced and fair, blending secular legal and religious expertise. | Critics may argue that State-appointed members dilute religious autonomy and make the tribunal an extension of government control over a religious institution. |
| Appeal Mechanism | Introducing a clear appeal to the High Court promotes transparency, accountability, and respect for legal norms—pillars of a secular democracy. | Some fear judicial review of Waqf matters by secular courts may conflict with religious practices, and hence intrude into faith-based self-regulation. |
Criticism from the Opposition
- Violation of Religious Freedom and Philanthropy Rights: The ban on non-Muslims creating Waqf is seen as a violation of religious freedom.
Eg: If a Hindu philanthropist wishes to donate land to a mosque for educational purposes, the law now prohibits it from being treated as Waqf. - Interference in Personal and Religious Affairs: The restructuring of tribunals and mandatory non-Muslim representation are viewed as excessive state interference.
Eg: The inclusion of non-Muslims in bodies managing Islamic religious endowments is seen by some as an imposition on community autonomy. - Lack of Community Consultation: The amendment was introduced without engaging major Muslim organizations or Waqf practitioners.
- Political Targeting Allegations: Some opposition leaders allege the law disproportionately regulates minority-managed religious properties.
- Fear of Misuse of Tribunal Restructuring: Transferring certain matters to civil courts and restructuring tribunals raises fears of judicial delays and weakened community control.
Way Forward
- Initiate Inclusive Multi-Stakeholder Dialogue: Engage religious leaders, legal experts, civil society, and State Waqf Boards in policymaking to rebuild trust.
- Ensure Legal and Gender Inclusivity: Revisit eligibility clauses and promote gender-balanced appointments within Waqf governance structures.
- Digitize and Geo-Tag All Properties: Full digitization, GIS mapping, and real-time monitoring to reduce fraud, encroachment, and ghost listings.
- Strengthen Audit Mechanisms: Mandate annual audits by third-party or CAG-authorized bodies to ensure transparency in Waqf finances.
- Empower Tribunals with Judicial Capacity: Instead of dismantling, strengthen Waqf Tribunals with better-trained judicial officers and faster grievance redressal timelines.
- Safeguard Minority Autonomy While Ensuring Accountability: Strike a balance between secular oversight and community self-governance by refining board compositions through consultations.
Back to Basics: Waqf (Amendment) Bill
Concept of Waqf
- Waqf is a permanent and irrevocable dedication of property by a Muslim for religious, pious, or charitable purposes.
- The ownership of the property is considered to be transferred to “Allah”, with no human or institution holding claim over it.
- Once declared as Waqf, the property becomes inalienable — it cannot be sold, transferred, mortgaged, or inherited.
- The person who creates a Waqf is called a Waqif, and the one appointed to manage it is a Mutawalli.
- Waqf can include mosques, graveyards, educational institutions, hospitals, and orphanages, among others.
- The concept has roots in Islamic jurisprudence and has existed in India since the Delhi Sultanate era.
Legal Framework
- The Waqf Act, 1995 is the primary legislation governing the administration and protection of Waqf properties in India.
- The Act provides for the establishment of State Waqf Boards and a Central Waqf Council to oversee and regulate Waqf assets.
- The 2013 amendment enhanced transparency through measures like mandatory registration and surveys of Waqf properties.
- The Act empowered Waqf Boards to declare, manage, and protect Waqf lands, including initiating eviction of encroachments.
- Waqf Tribunals were established to resolve disputes, with no appeal provision to civil courts (till 2024 amendment).
- Waqf properties are exempt from the Limitation Act, allowing Waqf Boards to reclaim land without time restriction.
Rationale Behind the Amendment
- There were increasing cases of encroachments, illegal sales, and forced declarations of private or public lands as Waqf.
- Multiple court cases and PILs raised concerns about arbitrary claims and lack of procedural safeguards.
- Non-Muslim stakeholders alleged they were not consulted during land surveys or declarations, leading to unrest.
- Gender injustice was noted in cases where women’s inheritance rights were bypassed in family Waqf declarations.
- The existing law lacked provisions for judicial oversight, digital record-keeping, and independent auditing.
- Rising criticism over lack of transparency and political misuse of Waqf provisions necessitated structural reforms.
SMASH MAINS MOCK DROP
The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 seeks to strike a balance between religious autonomy and constitutional accountability. In light of this, critically examine the implications of the new law on property rights, secularism, and minority welfare in India.
