Amanatullah Khan.
Credit: PTI Photo
New Delhi: After All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) chief Asaduddin Owaisi and Congress MP Mohammad Jawed, Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Amanatullah Khan on Saturday approached the Supreme Court, challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025, which was cleared by the Rajya Sabha on Friday.
In a plea filed through advocate Adeel Ahmed, he said the Waqf (Amendment) Bill seeks to extensively revise the Waqf Act, 1995, triggering widespread anxiety among Muslims, particularly due to changes that diluted the religious autonomy and constitutional protections of waqf institutions.
The plea sought a direction from the apex court to declare the Waqf (Amendment) Bill as unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14, 15, 21, 25, 26, and 300-A of the Constitution. It sought a mandamus restraining the respondents Union Government and Law and Justice Ministry from enforcing or operationalising the provisions of the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024.
It claimed Section 3(r) of the amended Act restricted Waqf creation to only Muslims who have practiced Islam for at least five years and who owned the property, and this disqualified historical forms of waqf by user and informal dedications.
“The introduction of non-Muslim members to the Waqf Boards and the Central Waqf Council under Sections 9 and 14 creates a classification that is not based on intelligible differentia, nor does it have a rational nexus with the object of religious property administration,” the plea contended.
The petitioner pointed out in State of West Bengal Vs Anwar Ali Sarkar (1952); this court held that a classification which leads to arbitrary treatment is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.
“The separate provision for Bohras and Aghakhanis (Section 13) without similar treatment to other sects of Islam (such as Deobandis or Barelvis) reflects unequal treatment within the same religious community,” the plea said.
It said Section 3C prohibited any government property from being declared waqf, and this statutory exclusion of government land, irrespective of historical evidence or user, disproportionately affected the Muslim community.
The plea said the transfer of adjudicatory powers from the tribunal to executive authorities like the district collector (Section 4) and the curtailment of tribunal’s stay powers (Section 83) amount to denial of fair procedure. The plea argued that the denial of legal recourse for unregistered waqfs after 6 months (Section 36(10)) amounts to statutory extinguishment of property rights without compensation.
“The statutory exclusion of waqf by user, the restrictions on decisions, and dilution of religious composition in governance bodies severely impair the ability of Muslims to preserve their religious and cultural institutions. Article 30 protects the rights of minorities to establish and administer institutions of their choice. By undermining the autonomy of Waqf Boards and religious charities, and centralising power in secular executive hands, the Bill encroaches upon this guarantee”, the plea said.