New Delhi, January 27, 2025 — In one of the most monumental legislative decisions, the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) had unanimously passed the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024, which contained 14 very important amendments, with an aim to revisit and reorganize the management and governance of Waqf properties across India.
Background of the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024
The Union Minister for Minority Affairs, Kiren Rijiju, introduced the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024, in the Lok Sabha on August 8, 2024. The bill seeks to amend the Waqf Act of 1995 to resolve issues pertaining to State Waqf Boards’ powers, the registration and survey of Waqf properties, and the removal of encroachments. One of the major proposals suggested that the existing Waqf Act, 1995, be renamed Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency, and Development Act, 1995- “UMEED.”
Formation and Mandate of the Joint Parliamentary Committee
The introduction of the bill had already invited criticism from opposition parties, which expressed concerns regarding its possible effect on the federal structure and religious autonomy. In response to this criticism, the government suggested referring the bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee.
Accordingly, the Lok Sabha subsequently constituted a JPC comprised of 21 members on August 9, 2024, to scrutinize the bill in detail while making necessary recommendations for amendments.
Core amendments passed by JPC
The JPC, after intensive deliberations and consultations with various stakeholders, approved the 14 significant amendments to the bill. The specific wording of these amendments has not been made public; however, sources indicate these include:
Definition of ‘Waqf’: “Waqf” was redefined as a property that is managed and owned by someone who is a practicing Muslim and has been for five continuous years. This is to prevent any person without valid land ownership from creating Waqf through a deed, as well as stem the practice of “Waqf by user,” wherein a piece of land is made Waqf simply because it has, for generations, been used by a community for a purpose that is not acknowledged in a deed of dedication.
Composition of Waqf Boards and Councils: The amendments proposed shall ensure that the Central Waqf Council, State Waqf Boards, and Waqf Tribunals shall be more inclusively represented by persons drawn from various sectors of Muslim communities, including representing the Shia, the Sunni Bohra, and the Agakhani sects, in addition to non-Muslims. The inclusion of non-Muslims has drawn a lot of dissent, with certain opposition members querying its necessity.
Survey and Registration of Waqf Properties: The bill attempts to transfer surveying powers of Waqf properties from survey commissioners to district collectors or officers of equivalent rank. Furthermore, the property should have a registration through a central PORTAL, which is aimed at creating a national registry and database for better accountability and transparency regarding Waqf properties.
Audit and governance: Güizl İçin ve vàng ki kyu nuhi shikar; increased strict provisions for Waqf accounts audit and governance and the authority of the union government to order audits by the CAG have also been introduced vehicle to destroy the CAG.
Removal of Encroachments: The amendments license clear procedures for an expanded range of Waqf Board powers regarding the removal of encroachments.Waqf properties encroachment shall find.
Opposition and concerns
Ray Yasok-KI with the implications of the Bill of Rights have been varied; members far from advocates have accused the Bill on occasion of endangering the religious freedoms of minorities or defeating the federal structure.”
An Attac-feazl where one member of the Congress party KC Venugopal says it became the attack on the federal theorem,” and another AoAIMI of All India Majlis Asaduddin Owaisi, called the Bill “um निकाल करने irfromunconstitutionality vague in relief of Articles gibt hu Eien and relieved inciso conventient de estado.
Additionally, the whole process of consulting other parties before drafting the bill is under suspicion. The amendment proposed in Parliament, they claim, were not the same as those made by the Ministry of Minority Affairs after consultation with stakeholders.
They say these discussions last year only included state government representatives and the CEOs of state waqf boards, which begs the question, “Was substantial stakeholder consultation conducted when drafting the amendment bill?”
