The Central government on Wednesday informed the Supreme Court that waqf is a form of charity and not an essential tenet of Islam. Arguing before a bench comprising Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta emphasised that waqf boards perform secular roles and are distinct from purely religious institutions like Hindu temples.
“Waqf is rooted in Islamic tradition, but it is not an essential part of the religion,” Mehta said. “It is simply a charitable practice within Islam. Charity exists across all religions—Christians have it, Hindus have the concept of daan, and Sikhs also practice it.”
The Solicitor General made these remarks while defending the Centre’s position in a batch of petitions challenging the constitutionality of the Waqf Act and recent amendments to it. He appeared a day after the petitioners, representing the Muslim side, presented their arguments.
A key point of contention is the ‘waqf-by-user’ doctrine, which has been removed in the amended legislation. This earlier provision allowed properties to be declared waqf based on prolonged religious or charitable use, even if no formal documentation existed. The Centre has now done away with this practice, and Mehta stressed that this doctrine is not a fundamental right.
“Waqf-by-user is not permissible prospectively, except under three conditions: if the property is registered, privately owned, or government land,” Mehta clarified. He added that no individual or group has a right to claim government property as waqf under this principle.
“There’s a Supreme Court ruling that supports the government’s authority to reclaim land that has been wrongly classified as waqf, even if it is being used for charitable or religious purposes,” he said.
Also Read: Centre asks SC to limit Waqf case to 3 issues for interim order
Mehta also underscored the legitimacy of the Centre’s authority in regulating waqf properties, stating that the recent amendments aim to address long-standing issues that persisted since the British colonial era. “This problem has existed since 1923. We’ve taken steps to resolve it in consultation with all stakeholders,” he said.
Citing the scale of engagement, Mehta noted, “We received 96 lakh representations during the process. The Joint Parliamentary Committee held 36 meetings. A handful of petitioners cannot claim to represent the entire Muslim community.”
In the previous day’s hearing, Chief Justice Gavai had emphasised the need for a strong case to challenge a law passed by Parliament, pointing to the "presumption of constitutionality" in legislative enactments. “For any interim relief, there must be a very strong and glaring case,” the CJI remarked, responding to senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who was arguing for the petitioners.
The Centre, in its submissions, has urged the Supreme Court to narrow the scope of the hearing to three key issues:
- The validity of the waqf-by-user principle;
- The nomination of non-Muslims to the Central Waqf Council and state waqf boards;
- The identification and classification of government land as waqf property.
Also Read: Courts intervene only if clear 'unconstitutionality' in case: CJI
Follow us
