Supreme Court resumes hearing pleas against Waqf Act
The Supreme Court Wednesday resumed its hearing of pleas against Waqf (Amendment) Act. This is the second consecutive day that the apex court is hearing a batch of petitions seeking interim stay on the amendments.
As the hearing began on Tuesday, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal told the top court that though the 2025 Act claims to be for protection of waqf, it was 'in reality… designed to capture waqf through a process which is non-judicial… executive.'
Appearing for one of the petitioners, who have sought interim stay of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, Sibal told the top court, 'Private properties are being taken away only because there is some dispute.'
Meanwhile, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued that 'waqf, by its very nature, is a secular concept' and that the law does not touch upon any essential religious practices of Muslims.
'It may be noted that Waqf, by its very nature, is a secular concept. This is so since waqf merely means dedication of property,' Mehta stated in a 145-page note submitted to the Court.
The Supreme Court bench, comprising Chief Justice of India B R Gavai and Justice Augustine G Masih, observed that 'a very strong and glaring case' is needed to pause the operation of the law.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
22 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Bombay HC questions RTI law ‘misuse', seeks expeditious disposal of SIC's complaints
Disposing of the PIL seeking efficient functioning of State Information Commission (SIC), the Bombay High Court questioned 'misuse' of Right To Information (RTI) through 'frivolous' applications filed before the authorities under the RTI Act, 2005. After the lawyer representing SIC referred to some applications including the one as to how many Samosas were served at certain offices were filed, Chief Justice Alok Aradhe orally remarked, 'It is a paradox. Laws are made with a beneficial purpose This is now being misused. RTI is even being filed to find a prospective son-in-law, to get information about young government officers' qualifications.' The Court also directed the SIC to dispose of second appeals under RTI Act, 2005 in an expeditious manner. The HC was informed by the Maharashtra government that the post of State Chief Information Commissioner (State CIC) and seven divisional Information Commissioners (ICs) were filled in April and there was no vacancy in the Commission. A division bench of CJ Aradhe and Justice Sandeep V Marne disposed of a PIL filed by former chief information commissioner Shailesh Gandhi and some Right to Information (RTI) activists, through advocate Sunil Ahya in 2020. The PIL had claimed that disposal of second appeals before the Commission takes much time, ultimately frustrating the information seekers. The petitioner sought direction from the court to the SIC to chalk out a roadmap to dispose of nearly one lakh second appeals before authorities and complaints within 45 days. The PIL also sought creation of three additional posts of Information Commissioners in the state. AddItional govt Pleader Jyoti Chavan for the state government submitted that four vacancies including State CIC and three ICs were filled up in April, this year. She stated that the government is presently considering the financial impact of creation of three additional posts of ICs and shall take a decision if the occasion so arises.
Time of India
42 minutes ago
- Time of India
SC deadline nears, illegal buildings in protected Aravalis face bulldozers
GURUGRAM : Just a month-and-a-half to go for a Supreme Court-ordered deadline, the forest department and Faridabad administration on Wednesday started a 15-day demolition drive to remove all illegal construction and encroachments from protected Aravali land in the district. Officials said around a dozen banquet halls, boundary walls, gates and farmhouses that were built in Anangpur village of Faridabad were razed on Wednesday. This area is protected under Section 4 (special orders) of the Punjab Land Preservation Act (PLPA), which bars construction and any non-forest activities in forests. "We have started the demolition drive. We appeal to people to remove illegal encroachment themselves," a senior forest official said. Haryana govt ordered the demolition drive after the Supreme Court gave the state a three-month extension to clear protected Aravalis of illegal construction. SC, in July 2022, had ruled that all Aravali land under PLPA (special orders) should be treated as forest, with provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Act applicable there, and any illegal construction should be demolished. Despite clear directives, Haryana over the years did not complete the task, having razed some 30 structures in four villages of Faridabad since the 2022 ruling. The apex court will take up the case next on Sept 8. The 15-day time frame was given to the Faridabad administration after a meeting chaired by chief secretary Anurag Rastogi on June 7. "All unauthorised constructions, including boundary walls — whether built before or after the 2021 survey—must be demolished within 15 days. The Municipal Corporation of Faridabad will oversee the removal of debris, with all costs to be borne by the property owners," read a document on minutes of the meeting. The Faridabad district magistrate will have to submit an action-taken report to the chief secretary, who also said the DM will be held accountable for any delay. Rastogi will hold another review meeting on June 27. On Wednesday, environmentalists said Faridabad was not the only Haryana district where protected Aravali forests have been encroached on. "Although demolition has begun in four villages of Faridabad after nearly three years, the order actually applies to special orders of Section 4 PLPA on all of Haryana, not just these villages. So far, no other districts have initiated the drive," said Sunil Harsana, an ecologist and wildlife expert. After SC's 2022 order, Haryana forest department had carried out a survey to identify illegal construction and found that 6,973 structures – most of them banquet halls and residential settlements – were built over protected PLPA land in four villages of Faridabad. A majority of these were in Anangpur (5,948) and the remaining in Ankhir, Lakkarpur, and Mewla Maharajpur. No such survey has been organised in Gurgaon. But activists allege that illegal construction is rampant in the Aravalis of Sohna, Raisina and Gwalpahari in the city, all of which are also protected by PLPA's special orders.
India Gazette
an hour ago
- India Gazette
"Will move SC to challenge DDA's demarcation of properties in Batla House area": AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan
New Delhi [India], June 12 (ANI): Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MLA Amanatullah Khan on Thursday said he would move the Supreme Court to challenge the Delhi Development Authority's (DDA) demarcation of properties in the Batla House area of Okhla. The move followed directions from the High Court's Division Bench, which granted affected residents three days to file individual writ petitions. This comes a day after Khan withdrew his Public Interest Litigation (PIL) from the Delhi High Court that had sought to stop demolition action initiated by the DDA. Speaking to ANI, the AAP MLA said, 'The Division Bench has given time for the affected parties to file their writ individually within three days. We have also withdrawn our PIL. People have been living there since 1971, and you suddenly declared it unauthorised and separated it from the PM-UDAY scheme.' '...The manner in which DDA wants to demolish this entire area is beyond my demarcation done by them is not accurate. I withdrew my plea because I will challenge the demarcation before the Supreme Court,' he said. Khan withdrew the PIL on Wednesday to inform the residents of his area to file an appropriate petition before the court. The withdrawal was allowed by a division bench of Justices Girish Kathpalia and Tejas Karia of the Delhi High Court, which suggested that individual residents approach the court with their grievances. 'In furtherance of the last order, senior counsel on the instructions of briefing counsel seeks permission to withdraw the petition filed by the petitioner, who is a public-spirited person, so he can inform the residents of Batla House to file an appropriate petition before the court,' the High Court said. At the outset of the hearing, the High Court noted that some aggrieved individuals have already been given protection by the court after hearing their individual petitions. The High Court at the beginning emphasised that any adverse order while deciding the PIL may affect the rights of the individuals who are already before the single-judge bench. The court has also emphasised that any aggrieved individual may approach the court like other people who have already approached the court. This issue is not a subject matter of the PIL. Khan had filed a PIL challenging the notice issued by the DDA for the demolition of alleged illegal properties in the area of Batla House in Okhla. The High Court on Monday had refused to grant an immediate interim stay on the demolition, which was proposed for June 11. Earlier, the apex court on May 7 refused to grant relief and directed the demolition of the illegal properties. Senior advocate Salman Khurshid appeared for the petitioner and argued that they (DDA) are pasting notices on the properties which fall beyond the khasra no. 279. The order of the Supreme Court was regarding the illegal properties within this khasra. The counsel for respondents contended, on the other hand, that the PIL is not maintainable as the Supreme Court specifically directed that the individual aggrieved persons adopt the legal remedy. DDA's counsel also said that the notices issued by the DDA are not generic and are in compliance with the Supreme Court. All the notices were given 15 days to respond. No demolition was carried out during the notice period. (ANI)
