Key highlights of Supreme Court order on pleas challenging validity of 2025 Waqf law

New Delhi: Here are the key takeaways of the Supreme Court's order which on Monday stayed several key provisions of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, but refused to stay the entire law.

*A bench of Chief Justice of India B R Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih refused to stay the operation of the entire Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025.

* SC says it did not find any case to stay provisions of the entire statute. "We have considered prima facie challenge to each of the sections. We have found that no case was made out to stay entire provisions of statute. However some sections need some protection," it said.

*The Supreme Court order stayed Sections 3(r), 2(c) proviso, 3(c) and 23.

*Provision in Section 3(1)(r) requiring only a person practising Islam for at least five years can create a waqf is put on hold.

*SC said the stay will remain until rules are framed by the state government to determine how such practice will be verified.

*SC partly stayed waqf property inquiry provisions which meant a property cannot be treated as non-waqf solely on the designated officer’s report.

*SC said revenue records and board records will not be altered based only on such reports.

*SC said waqfs will not be dispossessed of their properties nor will entries in official records be changed until the title dispute is finally decided by the Waqf Tribunal under Section 83, subject to high court appeals.

*SC said, however, during such proceedings, no third-party rights can be created in respect of those properties.

*SC capped non-Muslims’ representation in state waqf boards and the Central Waqf Council.

The court said that there cant be more than three non-Muslim members in the Waqf Board and in total not more than four non-Muslim members in Waqf Council.

It said in 11-members state waqf boards, a maximum of three non-Muslim can be members.

* SC dealt with the issue of CEO of Waqf Board and did not stay Section 23 which deals with the appointment of CEO as ex-officio Secretary.

It, however, said as far as possible, the CEO should be appointed from the Muslim community.

*SC said these directions are interim in nature and will not affect arguments or decisions on the constitutional validity of the amended provisions at the final stage.

(With DHNS, PTI inputs)