The Central government is prepared to introduce the Waqf Amendment Bill, 2024, in the Lok Sabha on August 8 to further amend the Waqf Act of 1995, which faced resistance from the Opposition parties. The new Bill has some major alterations, one of which is assigning a role to the ‘district collector’ when disputes related to the Waqf Act are to be solved.
One of the main proposals in the draft Bill is the substitution of the term ‘Waqf’ with the terminology ‘Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency, and Development’ in the parent 1995 Act.
Two major amendments are proposed in the Bill: the first makes provisions for the district collector to be appointed as the arbiter in cases of disputes regarding whether any property is Waqf property or government land. This has been effected by introducing clause 3C in the 1995 Act.
Under 3C (1), “Any property belonging to, or seized by, the Government which, before or after the commencement of this Act, has been, or is notified or declared, as a waqf property under this Act shall not be treated as a waqf property.”
According to Article 3C (2), “If any question arises whether any land is Government land, such question shall be referred to the district collector who shall decide the same after making an inquiry, and send a report to the State Government.”. But until the collector sends this report, the property shall not be deemed to be Waqf property.
The constituting of such decisions used to be solely decided by the Waqf tribunal before, whose decision was stated as final under Section 6 of the old Act. This is exactly what the new Bill aims to omit, that is, the words “shall be final”, so that the government may interfere in deciding Waqf property status.
Second, the Bill seeks to abolish the concept of “Waqf by use.” In most cases, under Islamic law, Waqf properties were dedicated orally until documentation became customary. For example, a masjid may be adjudged Waqf if it was used continuously for such purposes without any formal waqfnama. Thus, by abolishing the provisions under “Waqf by use,” the Bill renders the status of Waqf properties uncertain without valid documentation.
The Bill also amends Section 36 which deals with the registration of new Waqf properties, stipulating that no Waqf shall be created except with a formal Waqf deed. It also provides for the applicant to send the applications for registration of Waqf property to the district collector for verification of the authenticity of the application. Where the collector’s report shows that the property is disputed or government land, the Waqf shall not be registered until the dispute is decided by a competent court.
Another important amendment is that it is no longer mandatory that the chief executive officer of a Waqf Board should be a Muslim, a requirement that was there in the original Act.
The introduction of the Bill evoked a sharp response from opposition parties and Muslim organisations. Clear and unequivocal was the stand taken by the AIMPLB: any interference with the Waqf properties and the legal status and powers of the Waqf Boards would not be tolerated. They urged the National Democratic Alliance allies and opposition parties to reject the Bill and scuttle its passage in Parliament.
The opposition parties have declared they will oppose the Bill, while government sources say it is needed to bring transparency to the management of Waqf properties.
The former Vice-Chancellor of Aligarh Muslim University, Tariq Mansoor, called for a dispassionate analysis of the proposed reforms. He mentioned that there is a dire need for social justice and gender equity in Waqf Boards, and technology should be used to manage Waqf properties in a better way. It should learn from best practices in Islamic nations where Waqf organizations are generally found involved in charitable activities.