By S.N. Verma
The Supreme Court’s interim order of September 15, 2025, on the Waqf (Amendment) Act has triggered contrasting reactions. Critics expected a blanket stay; instead, the Court issued only a partial interim stay on a few contentious provisions, while refusing to halt the Act in its entirety. Far from being a setback, the ruling is a calibrated judicial endorsement of the government’s reform agenda.
No Blanket Stay = Presumption of Constitutionality
At the heart of the judgment lies the Court’s refusal to suspend the entire law. This is crucial: the judiciary presumes Parliamentary enactments to be constitutional. By allowing the Act to continue, the Court has sent a clear signal that the Waqf reforms are not prima facie unconstitutional.
For the Modi Sarkar, this is an important legal and political victory. The “secular” propaganda machine that demanded scrapping of the law in totality has been effectively silenced.
Provisions Under Partial Stay
Five-Year “Practising Islam” Requirement
The Act mandated that a waqif (the person creating a waqf) must have practised Islam continuously for at least five years. The Court has stayed this clause until States frame rules.
Reality check: NDA-ruled States can align rules with the Centre’s vision. However, opposition ruled States will face public scrutiny as people are going to ask them do they protect people’s ancestral land or gift it away?
Collector’s Powers
The Act empowered Collectors to decide whether land is waqf or government property, and to alter records accordingly. SC has stayed these provisions, holding that executive officers cannot usurp the role of tribunals.
Net effect: This prevents misuse by politically loyal bureaucrats in opposition-ruled States. The adjudication will now rest with quasi-judicial bodies, ensuring fairness.
Non-Muslim Representation in Waqf Boards
The Court capped non-Muslim representation to 4 in the Central Waqf Council and 3 in State Boards (for 11-member boards). It also said the CEO/chairperson should “as far as possible” be a Muslim.
But here’s the catch: The Court did not stay the provision that allows a non-Muslim to be appointed CEO of the Board. This leaves the government with a critical lever of oversight.
Provisions That Stand Intact
Abolition of “Waqf by User”: One of the most powerful tools of land encroachment has been permanently struck down by Parliament. SC has not stayed this reform.
Non-Muslim CEOs & Ex-Officio Members: Still allowed, despite limits on membership numbers.
These are game-changing reforms that remain untouched.
Judicial Principles at Play
Separation of Powers: SC rightly curbed arbitrary powers of Collectors, reinforcing the role of tribunals.
Equality & Religious Freedom: By staying the five-year requirement until rules are framed, SC prevented potential arbitrariness against converts or new adherents.
Balance of Autonomy & Inclusivity: By capping non-Muslim membership, SC maintained Waqf Boards as minority-led institutions, while still allowing broader perspectives.
Why This is a Victory for Modi Sarkar, Not a Setback
Those branding the verdict as a “blow” to Modi Sarkar miss the larger picture:
-The Act remains alive and operational.
-Major reforms—especially the deletion of “waqf by user”—are untouched.
- Interim stays are surgical, meant to refine, not repeal.
-Government retains decisive influence through CEO appointments.
In plain terms, those who had indulged in Land Jihad for long have lost their biggest weapon, and the constitutional validity of the law is intact.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court has delivered a measured verdict—blocking provisions prone to misuse, but leaving the architecture of reform unshaken. For the Modi government, this is both a legal endorsement and a political boost.
The message is clear: the Waqf Amendment Act is here to stay. Fake campaigns by so-called secularists have lost steam, and the path to reforming centuries-old misuse of waqf lands has been judicially secured.
No comments:
Post a Comment