Sheikh Noorul Hassan, a Member of the Legislative Assembly from Kshetrigao constituency in Manipur and a prominent leader of the National People's Party (NPP), has approached the Supreme Court with a petition challenging the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025. His party, the NPP, is an ally of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and is a part of the National Democratic Alliance (NDA).
In his plea, Hassan argued that the amendments made by the new law unjustly restrict the rights of Scheduled Tribe members who follow Islam. According to him, the law prevents these individuals from dedicating their property as waqf, thus violating their fundamental right to practice their religion freely.
Read Also:- SP MP Zia Ur Rehman Moves Supreme Court Against Waqf Amendment Act 2025, Terms It "Manifestly Arbitrary"
The amendment specifically includes Section 3E, which prohibits any land owned by Scheduled Tribe members under the Fifth or Sixth Schedule of the Constitution from being declared as waqf property.
“As per Section 3E, no land belonging to members of Scheduled Tribes under the Fifth or Sixth Schedule to the Constitution shall be declared or deemed to be waqf property. Hence such a prohibition precludes the members of the Schedule Tribes from exercising their religious rights and is thus discriminatory,” the plea reads.
The Act received Presidential assent on April 5, 2025, shortly after its passage by Parliament on April 4 following only a few hours of discussion.
Read Also:- Petitions Filed in SC Challenging Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 for Violating Constitutional Rights of Muslims
The petitioner described the amendments as arbitrary and accused the government of attempting to control Islamic religious endowments through increased state interference. He expressed concern that the religious nature of waqf property would be distorted and that such changes would cause irreversible damage to democratic governance in the waqf system.
“The amendment imposes arbitrary restrictions and enhances state control on Islamic religious endowments, deviating from the religious essence of waqf.”
He further alleged that the amendments resemble a government-led land grab, which contradicts the government's responsibility to safeguard waqf properties.
Elimination of Waqf by User
The petition raises serious objections to the removal of the provision recognizing “waqf by user.” Under traditional Islamic law, a waqf can be formed through long-term public use for religious purposes, even without a written deed.
Read Also:- Two RJD MPs Challenge Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 in Supreme Court Over Violation of Constitutional Rights
“The impugned Act aims to eliminate the concept of waqf by user by removing sub-clause (i) from Section 3(r). This contradicts the constitutional bench ruling in M. Siddiq (D) through L.Rs v. Mahant Suresh Das and others,” the plea stated.
It was highlighted that many waqf properties, some dating back centuries, became waqf through continued religious use. The removal of this recognition could now allow such properties to be questioned and potentially lost.
Five-Year Demonstration Requirement
Another point of contention is the new condition that a person must prove they have practiced Islam for five years to create a waqf. The petitioner calls this deeply intrusive.
“It is saddening to see legislation intruding into one’s private life, requiring an individual’s religiosity to be examined and assessed by authorities with no legal or religious standing to do so.”
He further argued that such a requirement is subjective and unenforceable.
“Showing or demonstrating that someone is a practicing Muslim cannot be made a condition. No authority, not even a Muslim body, can determine one’s personal relationship with the Almighty.”
He emphasized that permanent dedication to a pious purpose should be sufficient, and religious sincerity should not be judged by any external body.
Impact on Family Waqf (Waqf-alal-Aulad)
Under Section 3A(2) of the amended law, creating a family waqf cannot override inheritance laws, including the rights of women. While creators can name specific beneficiaries, legal inheritance laws still apply. This limits the discretion of the waqf creator, although such limitations are framed as aligning with fairness and legality.
Extended Time to Challenge Waqf Declarations
The new amendment extends the time to challenge waqf property notifications from one year to two years. Even beyond this, if a person can provide a valid reason for the delay, the notification can still be challenged.\
This provision appears to introduce flexibility but also raises concerns about prolonged uncertainty and legal challenges surrounding waqf property status.
Mandatory Inclusion of Non-Muslim Members in Waqf Bodies
The Act mandates that at least two non-Muslim members must be included in both the Central Waqf Council and State Waqf Boards. Hassan sees this as an infringement on the Muslim community’s autonomy in managing their religious institutions.
“The administration of religious institutions should be left to the people of that faith to preserve sanctity and ensure operations in accordance with faith-specific laws.”
“Imposing non-Muslim officers on Waqf governance singles out Muslims, violating Article 14’s promise of equality and Article 26’s assurance of religious autonomy.”
The petitioner warned that this could set a dangerous precedent affecting the autonomy of other religious groups in the future.
State Control Over Waqf Property Disputes
According to Section 3C, the government now has the authority to determine whether a disputed property is waqf or government-owned. A government-appointed officer can conduct an inquiry and decide the character of the property.
Read Also:- Waqf Amendment Act 2025 Comes Into Force from April 8, Centre Issues Notification
“The Government is now the ‘Judge, Jury, and Executioner,’” the plea alleges.
This centralization of power is feared to lead to a widespread takeover of waqf lands by state authorities.
Conflict Between Waqf and Heritage Laws
The new Section 3D renders waqf declarations void if the property is a protected monument under heritage laws. This contradicts the established legal principle that waqf property is permanently dedicated.
“Waqf property by its very essence is a permanent dedication, and the principle ‘once a waqf, always a waqf’ has been upheld by this Hon’ble Court in numerous judgments.”
Therefore, declaring such waqf properties as void is seen as legally unsustainable.
The petitioner has requested the Supreme Court to declare the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 as unconstitutional, stating it violates Articles 14, 25, and 26 of the Constitution.
He seeks:
- A writ or direction striking down the Act,
- A declaration that the law is in breach of the constitutional rights of citizens,
- And any other relief the Court deems just and proper under the circumstances.
The petition was filed through Abdulla Naseeh VT AoR.
Case Details : Sheikh Noorul Hassan Versus Union of India & Ors.
