Religious Autonomy v. State Intervention: Government’s Rule on God’s Property via The Waqf Amendment Act, 2025

Abstract  

The Waqf Amendment is a significant statutory amendment of the year of 2025.Through Waqf major changes in Waqf property administration – composition of Waqf Boards- Registration and Verification of Waqf properties- Treatment of ‘Waqf by Users’-government oversight mechanisms, the amendment accelerated Constitutional challenges before the Supreme Court and questioned religious freedom ,minority rights and state registration.

It puts forward a questionable debate of whether the government can interfere , regulate the administration of the properties of Waqf and in doing so , does it violate religious freedom under Article 25 and 26. In simple words, does this reform infringe Article 25 and 26 or not. Article 25 deals with Freedom of Conscience and Right to freely practice religion. Article 26 deals with freedom to manage religious affairs. It removes the concept of ‘Waqf by User’.

Introduction

The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 also known as the UMEED Act for Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency, and Development) was passed the Indian Parliament and received Presidential assent in April 2025. It reforms the Waqf Act 1995,and addresses state control , makes changes in the administration of Islamic endowments in India and enhance transparency. Multiple PILs and writ petitions have been fi8lled challenging the Constitutionality of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. Asaduddin Qwaisi v. Union of India is a major such petition before the Supreme Court of India. 

The object of the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025 is to amend the Waqf Act 1995, to address the issues and challenge in regulation and managing Waqf properties. The Amendment bill aims to:

• Overcome the shortcomings of the previous act and enhance the efficiency of Waqf Boards.
• Enhancing and improving the registration process.
• Updating the definitions of Waqf.
• Increasing the role of technology in managing in Waqf records.

Before the amendment, the Waqf act had the following characteristics-

• The Central Waqf Council and State Waqf Boards composed of Muslim members exclusively. It consists of the representatives elected by the members of Parliament , State legislators ,Bar Council members and Mutawallis (property managers) from the Muslim Community to the Board.
• The concept of Waqf by user prevailed where property could be declared as Waqf based on charitable purposes, irrespective of any formal written deed or legal document.
• Any person following and practicing the Islam could permanently dedicate property (immovable or movable) to God.
• Specialised Waqf Tribunals would look into the disputes regarding whether a particular land asset was a Waqf property .The decisions of these tribunals were final and binding upon all. Civil Courts were not allowed to look into this matter.
• A Specialised ‘Survey Commissioner of Waqf’ appointed by the state government. Its role was to independently identify, survey and update the list of community endowments. 

Changes brought about in the Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025-

• The Central Waqf Council and State Waqf Boards must now also include non-Muslim members and female representatives along with existing representation from different Muslim sects. (Section 9 and 14 of the Amended Waqf Act). In case of Central Waqf Council, out of 22 members, 12 members could be non-members; thereby leaving space only for 10 members can be Muslims in the Council. In the State Waqf Board, it is submitted that out of 11 members, 7 members could be non-Muslims, again enabling a majority of non- Muslims to manage the affairs of the Waqf.
• The act needs the person to the lawful owner of a property in order to dedicate it as Waqf. The concept of ‘Waqf by user’ provision is also abolished (section 3r of the Amended Waqf Act) for future properties. The existing registration would remain valid unless they are disputed.
• In September 2025, the Supreme Court stated specific provisions specifically that a person must be a person must be Muslim who has been practicing Islam for 5 year prior to the endowment.
• The Amendment removed the Waqf Tribunals from being the final decision making authority. The aggrieved parties or even the board can now appeal tribunal orders directly to the High Court.
• The significant role of the specialised ‘Survey Commissions’ has been transferred to the State’s Revenue Collected. If the property so claimed as Waqf is designated as government land, then as per the amendment the collector holds the power to adjudicate it’s ownership status.

Legal Issues

The act is said to be violating Article 14, 15,19, 21,25,26 of the Constitution and infringing the rights of the citizens to continue with their religious practices.

• Attack on Religious Freedom 

Section 3E Of the Amended Act provided that no land belonging to members of Scheduled tribes under the provisions of Fifth and Sixth Schedule of the Constitution is permitted to be considered as Waqf property. Critics state that such restriction is a direct attack on the religious freedom of persons belonging to Scheduled Tribes who are practicing Islam and who desire to devote their properties for creation of the Waqf.

• Issue relating to Section 9,14,23

Amendments of provisions as per section 9,14 and 23 of the original Waqf Act have a direct impact on the Muslim Community as majority of the members in the Waqf Council and Waqf Boards could be non-muslins and they would be permitted to interfere in the affairs of the Waqfs , thus, directly affecting the rights of the Muslims to independently manage the affairs of their religious practices.

• Violation of provision on part III of the Constitution

Section 43 of the impugned Act deleted section 104 of the original Waqf Act which applied to the properties given and donated by persons not professing Islam for support of certain Waqfs , by putting restriction on non-Muslims to donate their properties for the Waqf related activities. This is a violation of the provisions of part III of the Constitution. The impugned act is also a direct attack on the secular character of the Constitution which deals with the right to preserve culture.

• Violation of Article 15

The requirement for the person to be practicing Islam for five years as per section 3r of the original Waqf Act was done to infuse terror and give entire control in the hands of the state. There is no such provision in any other religion which is concerned with the person practicing their religion for five years before being able to enjoy their rights. Therefore, the amended provision is totally violative of Article 15 of the constitution of India i.e., being discriminatory solely on the ground of religion.

• Section 3C says that if any question arises whether a property is a Waqf Property or not or whether a property is a government property, the collector of the District shall conduct an inquiry and submit a report to the State Government. The legal issue here is the state taking over administration of religious property aggravated the emergence of this issue.

Arguments Supporting the Act 

The Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025 has the following positive impact:-

• The amendment to the provision with regard to ‘Waqf by User’ has been made applicable to the Government property so that the government holds a property for and on behalf of it’s citizens and that to9o as a trustee. The State protects the government properties. Thus, helping prevent fraudulent claims over Waqf Properties.
• The Central Waqf Council is entitled to issue directive on the following aspects as per Section 9 sub section 4 –financial performance-survey-maintenance of Waqf deeds-revenue records-encroachment of Waqf properties-annual reports and audit reports. All such activities are secular activities and do not interfere with the religious practices of the Muslims.
• Mutawallis are only concerned with the administrative activities of the Waqf, and their functions have no bearing on the religious activities. Therefore, the impugned amendments are not violative of any of the rights guaranteed under Article 25 and 26 of the Constitution. The removal of Mutawallis through the provisions cannot be discriminatory. Similar provisions can also be found through removal of Mathadipatis in acts like Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Acts, 1987 and the Telengana Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowment Act, 1987.    

Case Laws

• State of Andhra Pradesh v A.P .State Wakf Board

In this case, the Supreme Court stated that the state Wakf Board is a ‘state’ as per section 12 of the constitution and that it acts as a statutory authority making it’s decisions and actions challengeable before writ courts. The court also clarified that through the power to determine the nature of the Wakf, the Board must at first conduct an inquiry and comply with the principles of natural justice. It was also held that all citizens should not straightaway file suits in ordinary civil courts regarding disputes of a Waqf property by bypassing the system of Waqf Tribunal.

• Viceroy Hotels Limited and Others v. Telengana State Waqf Board and Others

It was held that the Board may upon inquiry and collected information decide whether a property is a Wakf property or not or whether it is a Sunni Wakf or Shia Wakf as per the Wakf Act, 1955.

Conclusion

The Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025 represents one of the most important reforms of Wakf administration after the Wakf Act 1955.While the government depends on it on the aspects of transparency and government measure, critics argue on the grounds of religious freedom ,equality ,minority rights, property rights and separation of powers. The final constitutional validity however depends upon the adjudication of the Supreme Court, making it an important contemporary issue in Indian Constitutional and Administrative Law.

References

1. Ministry of Minority Affairs, ‘The Waqf (Amendment) Bill/Act 2025’ https://www.minorityaffairs.gov.in accessed 16 June 2026.
2. 2025 INSC 1116 Supreme Court of India from https://api.sci.gov.in
3. State of Andhra Pradesh v A.P. State Wakf Board, 07-Feb-2022 (Supreme Court) 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 136 / Civil Appeal No. 10770 of 2016.
4. Asaduddin Qwaisi v Union of India Writ Petition (Civil) No 269 of 2025 (Supreme Court of India, 17 April 2025).
5. Viceroy Hotels Limited v Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board (Supreme Court/High Court, 25 April 2024) https://indiankanoon.org accessed 16 June 2026.