Supreme Court to hear pleas challenging the Waqf Act on May 20
New Delhi [India], May 15 (ANI): The Supreme Court on Thursday said it would hear a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, on May 20 for interim relief.
A Bench comprising the Chief Justice of India, BR Gavai and Justice AG Masih will consider whether an interim relief of stay is required in the case.
The previous bench, headed by the then CJI Sanjiv Khanna, had said it would consider three issues for interim relief- de-notifying Waqf properties, whether they are Waqf by user or Waqf by deed, nominating non-Muslims to the Wakf Council and State Waqf Boards, and identifying government land under Waqf.
The apex court on Thursday said that, in the meantime, the assurance given by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta that the Central government would not implement the provisions of the Act, would continue.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, had assured the apex court that the key provisions of the Waqf Act, including provisions on de-notifying Waqf properties, inclusion of non-Muslims in the Central Waqf Council and Waqf Boards, and identification of government land under Waqf, will not be given effect to for some time.
The Solicitor General of India also assured that no appointments will be made to the Wakf Council or Waqf boards.
During the hearing, Solicitor Mehta said that the Centre has filed a detailed response in the petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf Act. Adjourning the matter, the bench said, 'We will be considering the issue of interim relief only on Tuesday (May 20).'
A batch of petitions challenging the Act was filed before the apex court, contending that it was discriminatory towards the Muslim community and violated their fundamental rights. Six Bharatiya Janata Party-ruled states had also moved the apex court in the matter, in support of the amendment.
President Droupadi Murmu gave her assent on April 5 to the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025, which was earlier passed by Parliament after heated debates in both Houses.
The central government filed its preliminary affidavit in the Supreme Court to seek dismissal of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, arguing that the law was not violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution.
The Centre, in its affidavit, had said the amendments are only for the regulation of the secular aspect regarding the management of the properties and hence, there was no violation of the religious freedoms guaranteed under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution.
The central government had urged the court not to stay any provisions of the Act, saying that it is a settled position in law that constitutional courts would not stay a statutory provision, either directly or indirectly, and would decide the matter finally.
It had said that taking away the statutory protection to a Waqf-by-user does not deprive a person of the Muslim community to create a Waqf. (ANI)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scroll.in
14 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
Funds under Right to Education need not be linked to National Education Policy: Madras HC to Centre
Funds payable by the Union government to state governments under the Right to Education Act need not be linked to the implementation of the National Education Policy, the Madras High Court said on Tuesday, according to Live Law. A bench of Justices GR Swaminathan and V Lakshminarayanan urged the Centre to release to Tamil Nadu the funds under the Right to Education Act. 'It is true that implementation of the Samagra Siksha Scheme is aligned to NEP 2020, but the obligation under RTE is independent by itself,' Live Law quoted the bench as saying. The Samagra Shiksha scheme, implemented in 2018, is the scheme through which the Union government provides support for elementary and secondary school education. In April, the Union Education Ministry had told the Rajya Sabha that Tamil Nadu, Kerala and West Bengal received no funds under the central education scheme for 2024-'25. Data shared in the Upper House by Minister of State for Education Jayant Choudhary showed that while Kerala was allocated Rs 328.90 crore, Tamil Nadu Rs 2,151.60 crore and West Bengal Rs 1,745.80 crore from the Centre for the current fiscal year under the scheme, no funds had been released to these states as of March 27. The halt in funding to Kerala, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal came against the backdrop of these states refusing to comply with the PM Schools for Rising India, or PM SHRI, scheme. The centrally-sponsored scheme aims to upgrade the infrastructure of schools managed by central, state or regional bodies. However, to avail the scheme's benefits, state governments must first sign a memorandum of understanding with the Centre to implement the 2020 National Education Policy. Tamil Nadu has repeatedly expressed opposition to the three-language formula in the National Education Policy. The state government said it will not change its decades-old two-language policy of teaching students Tamil and English. Of the total funds pending to be paid to the state, the Right to Education component amounts to Rs 200 crore, according to The Hindu. On Tuesday, the High Court pointed out that under section 7 of the Right to Education Act, states and the Union government have concurrent responsibility for providing funds to carry out its provisions. 'Therefore, funds payable to the state governments representing the central government share towards discharging the RTE obligations need not be linked to NEP 2020,' said the bench. It also took note that the state government had moved the Supreme Court against the Centre withholding funds under the Samagra Shiksha scheme. 'We are not in a position to issue any binding direction in this regard,' said the bench, urging the Union government to consider delinking the Right to Education component from the Samagra Siksha Scheme. The court was disposing of a public interest litigation petition seeking directions to the Tamil Nadu government to begin admissions under the Right to Education Act for 2025-'26.
India Today
20 minutes ago
- India Today
Why Mamata invoked PoK as Modi govt's ‘missed opportunity'
West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee, on June 10, questioned the Narendra Modi government's handling of national security following the terror strike in Kashmir's Pahalgam and suggested that India had missed a rare strategic opportunity to take control of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) during the subsequent military offensive.'There was a need to teach them a lesson; and we salute the bravery of our armed forces. India had an opportunity to take control of PoK,' Mamata said in the legislative mincing words in holding the Centre accountable for the April 22 Pahalgam attack, she said: 'The Pahalgam attack is the result of the Centre's callousness. Why were no security forces or police personnel present at the site?' She also took a swipe at the prime minister, remarking that 'PM Modi is only busy advertising himself', and accused the BJP of 'trying to politicise the valour of the armed forces'.Mamata unequivocally praised the armed forces for their precision strikes inside Pakistan. Her government moved a resolution in the legislative assembly condemning the Pahalgam massacre and hailing India's military response. Though the resolution conspicuously omitted the term 'Operation Sindoor', it recorded the assembly's 'gratitude and appreciation for the coordinated efforts of the Indian armed forces in destroying major terrorist infrastructures in Pakistan and PoK'.advertisement 'This House strongly condemns this brutal attack [in Pahalgam] and at the same time salutes the discipline, dedication and courage shown by different wings of the Indian armed forces in combatting terrorist activities and safeguarding the sovereignty of the nation,' the resolution stated, also acknowledging the 'extraordinary display of unity, compassion and resilience' by the people of Jammu and Kashmir in the aftermath of the tragedy. Mamata also questioned why the perpetrators of the Pahalgam attack hadn't been apprehended comments, especially her assertion about PoK and criticism of the Centre's diplomatic failure, gained attention. 'Not sure if our international diplomacy is having issues. Pakistan received loans from the IMF (International Monetary Fund) instead of being cornered globally,' she said, expressing doubt over India's ability to isolate Pakistan on the world the resolution was passed unanimously, it drew sharp criticism from the BJP. Party leader Agnimitra Paul questioned the omission of the term 'Operation Sindoor' in the official resolution. 'What kind of appreciation is this when the name Operation Sindoor hasn't even been mentioned in the resolution?' she asked, implying political double accused Mamata and the Trinamool Congress of posturing for international audiences. 'On the one hand, she is sending Abhishek Banerjee in the all-party delegation. He, while abroad, is painting a good picture that the Trinamool Congress is with the central government and our prime minister. However, the moment he comes back to India, he begins to demean and abuse our PM. Under whose leadership was all of this achieved?' she BJP's counterattack extended to Leader of the Opposition in the assembly Suvendu Adhikari, who accused the Trinamool Congress of failing to maintain consistency in its stance. While Adhikari's remarks were not included in the assembly proceedings, his party's criticism made clear that the political fallout of the Pahalgam attack and its military aftermath was far from Trinamool MLAs moved a breach of privilege motion against Adhikari for allegedly making defamatory remarks outside the assembly and claiming that Mamata Banerjee had 'praised Pakistan' more eloquently than Pakistan prime minister Shehbaz Sharif. Ministers, including Chandrima Bhattacharya and Sovandeb Chattopadhyay, signed the motion, with Firhad Hakim expected to join in. Assembly speaker Biman Banerjee confirmed receipt and may refer it to the privilege committee. Earlier, Adhikari had been suspended in February for unparliamentary the debate continues over how the government had handled the April 22 terror strike and Pakistan thereafter, Mamata's speech in the legislative assembly has shifted attention to strategic questions about India's foreign policy, domestic security gaps, and the Centre's 'missed opportunities' in leveraging military momentum for long-term geopolitical to India Today Magazine
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
25 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Judicial activism must not become 'judicial terrorism', says CJI Gavai
Chief Justice of India BR Gavai on Tuesday said that while judicial activism remains a necessary instrument within Indian democracy, it must be exercised with restraint and not be allowed to turn into 'judicial terrorism'. Speaking at the Oxford Union, CJI Gavai underlined the judiciary's constitutional duty to intervene when the legislature or executive fails to protect citizens' rights. However, he warned against overreach. 'Judicial activism is bound to stay. At the same time, judicial activism should not be turned into judicial terrorism. So, at times, you try to exceed the limits and try to enter into an area where, normally, the judiciary should not enter,' he said, as quoted by Bar and Bench. He emphasised that judicial review should be used sparingly, reserved only for the most exceptional cases. 'That power [judicial review] has to be exercised in a very limited area in very exception cases, like, say, a statute is violative of the basic structure of the Constitution, or it is in direct conflict with any of the fundamental rights of the Constitution, or if the statute is so patently arbitrary, discriminatory... the courts can exercise it, and the courts have done so,' he said. Constitution is a quiet revolution etched in ink: CJI Gavai Speaking on the theme 'From Representation to Realisation: Embodying the Constitution's Promise', Justice Gavai said, "Many decades ago, millions of citizens of India were called 'untouchables'. They were told they were impure. They were told that they did not belong. They were told that they could not speak for themselves. But here we are today, where a person belonging to those very people is speaking openly, as the holder of the highest office in the judiciary of the country." Gavai is the first Buddhist and only the second Dalit to serve as Chief Justice of India. 'The Constitution of India carries within it the heartbeat of those who were never meant to be heard, and the vision of a country where equality is not just promised, but pursued. It compels the State not only to protect rights, but also to actively uplift, to affirm, to repair," he added He further credited BR Ambedkar for envisioning a system where democracy extends beyond institutional checks and balances to include the redistribution of power among social groups. "At the Oxford Union today, I stand before you to say (that) for India's most vulnerable citizens, the Constitution is not merely a legal charter or a political framework, it is a feeling, a lifeline, a quiet revolution etched in ink. In my own journey, from a municipal school to the office of the Chief Justice of India, it has been a guiding force," he said. Concluding his speech, Justice Gavai quoted postcolonial theorist Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak: 'Yes, the subaltern can speak—and they have been speaking all along. The question is no longer whether they can speak, but whether society is truly listening.'
