The Centre has firmly asserted before the Supreme Court that no individual or entity can claim ownership of government land, regardless of whether such land has been historically used for religious or charitable purposes and subsequently classified as Waqf by user. This declaration was made during the ongoing hearings concerning the constitutional validity of the Waqf Act, 2025.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Union government, argued before a bench led by Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih that the government retains the authority to reclaim such properties. He emphasized that "Nobody has the right over government land," citing a Supreme Court judgment that supports the government's right to reclaim property belonging to the government, even if declared as Waqf.
The Centre's stance comes in response to a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. Mehta questioned the locus standi of the petitioners, pointing out that none of the directly affected parties had filed the petitions. He further defended the Parliament's competence to pass the legislation.
The Waqf Act, 2025 has been a subject of intense debate and scrutiny. Waqf refers to movable or immovable properties donated by Muslims for religious or charitable purposes, such as mosques, schools, graveyards, orphanages, and hospitals. These properties are managed by Waqf boards formed by state governments, with the Central Waqf Council coordinating their functioning. India has the largest number of Waqf assets in the world, with over 872,000 properties valued at approximately $14.22 billion.
A key point of contention within the Waqf Act is the concept of "Waqf by user." This refers to properties recognized as Waqf based on their long-term use for religious or charitable purposes, even without formal documentation. The Waqf Amendment Act, 2025, has brought in changes to the existing system. A major cause for concern is the removal of a provision called "waqf by user" - which allowed properties to be designated as waqf if they had been used for religious or charitable purposes by Muslims over time. According to government records, 402,000 waqf properties are classified as "waqf by user".
The Centre's assertion that no one has a right over government land, even under the Waqf by user principle, has significant implications. It suggests that the government can reclaim properties classified as Waqf by user if it determines that the land originally belonged to the government. This has raised concerns among some Muslim leaders and opposition parties, who view the Waqf Amendment Act as an attempt to weaken the rights of minorities.
The Supreme Court has sought the Centre's detailed response on whether an officer above the rank of district collector can be empowered to determine if a Waqf property is actually government land. The Centre defended the 2025 legislation, arguing that Waqf is inherently a secular construct and the new law merely seeks to regulate the secular administration of Waqf while safeguarding religious freedom. The Centre maintains that the Waqf Act, 2025, aims to streamline the management of Waqf properties, safeguard heritage sites, and promote social welfare.
The legal battle over the Waqf Act, 2025, is likely to continue in the Supreme Court. The outcome of this case will have far-reaching consequences for the management and ownership of Waqf properties in India.
