The Supreme Court on Monday (November 3, 2025) agreed to re-list for hearing the petition of All India Majlis-e-Ittehad-ul-Muslimeen (AIMIM) leader Asaduddin Owaisi, in which a request has been made to extend the deadline for compulsorily registering all Waqf properties, including Waqf By User, on the Umeed portal.

The petition was earlier listed for hearing on October 28, but the hearing could not take place on that day. On Monday, Owaisi’s lawyer Nizam Pasha told Chief Justice Bhushan Ramakrishna and Justice K. Requested to keep the matter for immediate hearing before the bench of Vinod Chandran.

The Chief Justice said, ‘We will fix a new date.’ The lawyer said that the six-month period prescribed for mandatory registration of Waqf properties is about to end. On September 15, the Supreme Court had stayed some key provisions of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 under an interim order. These included the provision that only persons who have followed Islam for the last five years can create Waqf. However, the entire law was not repealed.

The court had said that the central government’s order to remove the ‘Waqf by user’ provision in the new amended law was prima facie not arbitrary and there is no basis for the argument that the government will confiscate the Waqf land.

A property recognized as Waqf because it has been used for religious or charitable purposes for a long period of time without formal documentation is called ‘Waqf by User’. Owaisi’s lawyer told the court that as per the amended law, six months were given for registration of Waqf properties and five months passed during the court’s decision, now only one month is left.

The Center had launched the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development (Umeed) portal on June 6 to prepare digital documents of all Waqf properties and geo-tag them. According to the Umeed portal, details of all registered Waqf properties in India will have to be mandatorily uploaded within six months.

Waqf On the order of the Supreme Court on the Amendment Act Aimim Chief Asaduddin Owaisi Done Target on central government Sarcastic, Owaisi Said, “This is an interim order, We want the Supreme Court to give a final decision on the entire Act soon and its hearing starts. We hope that the Supreme Court will take a final decision soon. “

Supreme Court give final verdict as soon as possible: Owaisi

Hyderabad MP Owaisi Said that BJP government Waqf To take the land of this Act We have brought it, so we would like the Supreme Court to give a final decision on it as soon as possible. He said that the central government Data Provide who changes religion Waqf Has given land He said that the provision of investigation of the Collector has been banned, but the Collector still has the right to conduct the survey. “

Asaduddin Owaisi Said, ,For the appointment of CO, the Supreme Court had said that it should be a Muslim as far as possible. The government will claim that they did not find any qualified Muslim. A party who does not give a Muslim ticket to a Muslim and who does not have a single Muslim MP, will he choose a Muslim officer? “

How many Muslims are in Intelligence Bureau: Owaisi

Owaisi Asked, ,Intelligence Bureau How many Muslims are there? They Waqf Will appoint non-Muslim members in, Why? This is a violation of Article 26, If a non-side SGPC How will the Sikhs feel if you are made a member of? “

‘Supreme Court did not stop completely’

Owaisi said, “The Supreme Court has not completely banned the provision under which a person needs to be a Muslim for 5 years. There is no law to stop a person of any religion from donating to another. According to Article 300 of the Constitution, I can give my property to what I want. Then why has such a provision made for the followers of Islam?”

Also read: Registration of Waqf by user is not without valid deed; The court also accepted the condition of living for 5 years Muslim for Waqf, just a reason for a reason

The Supreme Court on Monday (September 15, 2025) refused to ban the Waqf law and said that there is a prior perception of constitutionality in its favor. However, the court stayed some provisions, including the provision, which said that only people who have been following Islam for the last five years can make Waqf. However, the court has refused to stop the provision of appointing non-Muslim to the post of CEO of Waqf Board.

While giving the interim order, the bench of Chief Justice Bhushan Ramakrishna Gavai and Justice Augustine George Christ said, “We thought prima facie the challenge given to each section and found that there is no case of banning the entire law.” However, the Supreme Court stayed the provision that it was said that only people who have been following Islam can make Waqf.

Collector cannot settle the land dispute
The court also stayed the provision which gives the right to any officer nominated by the government to decide whether the Waqf property is actually encroachment on government property. Chief Justice Gavai said, ‘We have admitted that the previous perception is always based on the constitutionality of the law and it can be done only in rare cases. We have found that the entire Act has been challenged, but the original challenge was on Section 3 (R), 3C, 14 …

How many non-Muslim members can be in Waqf Board?
CJI Gavai directed that as far as possible, the Chief Executive Officer of the State Waqf Board should be a Muslim. The Supreme Court has not banned the amendment allowing non-Muslim to appoint a CEO, but said that as far as possible, Muslims should be appointed. The CJI also said that the state Waqf boards and Central Waqf councils have limited the number of non-Muslims. Out of 22 members of the Central Waqf Councils, only four can be non-Muslim, while only non-Muslims out of 11 members of State Waqf Boards are allowed to be appointed.

The Supreme Court reserved its order on three major issues on 22 May, including the right to non-defrooting the Waqf by user declared by the courts, which came to light during the hearing of petitions challenging the validity of Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025.

Ban on condition of being a Muslim for five years to wakef
Supreme Court Waqf Some provisions of the amendment law 2025 have been banned until the final decision on the petitions filed against the law comes. Court Waqf To do five years to have a ban on the condition of following Islam and Waqf Boards The number of non-Muslim members has also been limited. The court said that a case of banning the entire law is not made.

The Supreme Court said that Waqf Property registration There is already a provision of, will not stop it, But gin Assets There is a dispute about them High Court A third party until the decision of Right Will not be made The Supreme Court said that Old Waqf Section 108 of the law A (Waqf Act It is not wrong to remove the provision of higher status from other laws) And On the provision that protects the land of the tribal class Not even stopping.

The Supreme Court has dismissed the petition of the Delhi Waqf Board filed for a gurdwara in the martyrdom of Delhi. The court says that when there is already a religious structure there, then let it be. The Waqf Board had filed this petition challenging the 2010 decision of the Delhi High Court, in which the High Court had ruled in favor of the defendant. The defendant says that this land was sold to him in the year 1953.

Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma were hearing the bench case. The bench told the Waqf Board that they should withdraw their claim on their own. On behalf of the petitioner, Senior Advocate Sanjay Ghosh said that the Delhi High Court had also admitted that there was a mosque, but now there is some kind of gurudwara. On this, the court told the lawyer that there is no kind, there is a proper gurdwara.

Justice Satish Chandra Sharma said, ‘There is a gurudwara on that land, which is also functioning. When there is a gurudwara, let him live. If a religious structure is already there, then you should withdraw your claim yourself.

The Waqf Board told the Supreme Court that there was a mosque named Babbar Shah at the disputed site. He said that this mosque was present since time immemorial and was dedicated to religious objectives. However, the defendant claims that in 1953, the disputed property was sold to him by his owner Mohammad Ehsan. In 2010, the Delhi High Court also ruled in favor of the defendant.

The High Court had said in its judgment that the defendant was occupied since 1947-48. It is also true that the defendant could not present any documents as the owner for the purchase of property, but the Waqf Board will not benefit. The court had said that if the board wants possession, then it will have to establish its case and present the documents.

Devkinandan thakur in sanatan samvad program: Famous narrator Devkinandan Thakur attended the Sanatan Samvad of ABP News on Sunday (June 01, 2025). Where he spoke openly about Sanatan Dharma. At the same time, he discussed about building a temple in Waqf Board Act and Aligarh Muslim University. He said that there will be an attempt to explain in the language that he understands.

Devkinandan Thakur said, “As much as there are eternal, they should understand one thing that Buddha is also ours, Rama is also ours, Krishna is also ours, this is our India and the tradition of India is also ours. The tradition of India cannot be completed without Rama and Buddha without Buddha. So it is not a dispute but a dialogue is needed.”

‘Why avoid building temples in Muslim University?’

He further said, “The second Muslim university has sent funds of nearly 5 thousand 600 crores from 2019 to 2022. The Muslim University has 22 to 24 mosques. If Hindu children who study and talk about the temple there, then why is there someone avoiding it? When the government is giving money in it, then the government should be for the development of Muslims and also for the development of Muslims and also for development of Sanatanis. So they should also say that you will worship your God. “

He said, “It is not possible that we keep believing and you eat us and eat us.

‘Why trouble showing Waqf paper?’

On the issue of triple talaq and waqf, Devkinandan Thakur said, “Who made the Waqf Board? When it was made in 1954, when it was made? When he took a country in the name of religion and formed Pakistan, when Pakistan is formed, why is there a Waqf Board? Keep it. I feel that a colony is in the name of the cemetery in Kanpur. “

‘Bangladesh pattern reaches Bengal’

He further said, “If there is anything against me, will I go out on the road and set fire to someone’s property? I cannot do this. I can register a protest by agitation or sit -in demonstration. But it is a Hindu house, so it has to set fire or it is a Hindu shop, so it was to loot it. It was a pattern in Bangladesh and this was the pattern and this is what we all did not protest in Bengal. Is.”

Also read: Maha Kumbh 2025: What Devkinandan Thakur has said for Jaya Bachchan by telling PM Modi a true Sanatani, know

In the petitions filed against the Waqf Amendment Act, 2025, the law has been described as a violation of Article 25 of the Constitution. Article 25 gives the right to guarantee the freedom of religion. The Center has given a strong reply to this plea of ​​the petitioners. On behalf of the Center, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said in the Supreme Court that Hindu code bill was brought and the rights of Hindus, Christians, Sikhs and Buddhist community were taken away, then no one said why Muslims were released.

A bench of Chief Justice Bhushan Ramakrishna Gawai and Justice Augustine George Christ reserved the verdict on Thursday (May 22, 2025) after three days of hearing. In the first day’s hearing, the petitioners made their arguments, while on May 21 and 22, the lawyers appearing for the Center and other states presented their stand in defense of the law.

On behalf of the Center, SG Tushar Mehta said that the new Waqf law is not contrary to Article 25 of the Constitution. He mentioned the Hindu Code Bill, which was brought to codes the rights of Hindus. He said, ‘When the Hindu Code Bill was introduced in the year 1956, their personal law rights were taken away from Hindus, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists and Jainism. Then no one said why Muslims were released and not others?

The purpose of the Hindu Code Bill was to create a codes and modern Hindu personal laws in a general civil code. This included women rights in property, equal divorce rights and other provisions on subjects like marriage, divorce, succession and adoption.

SG Tushar Mehta gave the example of the Tamil Nadu Endowment Act on the issue of the inclusion of non-Muslims in the Waqf Board, which allows the removal of the monastery on violation of rules. He said that and we are arguing here that Articles 25 and 26 will be violated by the inclusion of non-Muslims.

Tushar Mehta, stating the difference between Hindu settlement and waqf, said that Hindu settlement is only religious work. They do religious work, but the Waqf also includes secular institutions like schools, madrasa, orphanages and dharamshalas. Referring to the Bombay Public Trust Act, he said that it controls the temples of Maharashtra and there is a arrangement that the chairman can be from any religion, whereas it is not in Waqf.

SG Tushar Mehta said that Waqf consists of two officers, one Sajjadanshin, who is a spiritual head and sees the functioning related to religion. The second is, Mutavalli, who is an administrator or manager. He said that Sajjadanshin is not a subject in the Waqf Amendment Act, because this law has nothing to do with spiritual or religious functioning.

After the approval of President Draupadi Murmu on April 5, 2025, the Waqf Amendment Act came into force in the country, but many petitioners reached the Supreme Court demanding an interim ban on it. In the first hearing on 16 April, the bench of former Chief Justice Sanjeev Khanna heard 72 petitions and banned the new appointment in the board till the next hearing. At the same time, the status quo was also asked to maintain the status quo on the declared property declared.

Justice Sanjeev Khanna had transferred the case to the bench of the new CJI BR Gawai before his retirement. From 20 May to 22 May, the bench of CJI Gawai heard the Waqf law case for three days.

Also read:-
Shri Banke Bihari Temple Corridor of Rs 500 crore, who is forming UP government, reached the Supreme Court to protest, Devendra Nath Goswami, said to CJI Gawai- I am a descendant …

The Supreme Court Justice Augustin George Christ has made a very important remarks on the petitions filed against the Waqf Amendment Act, 2025 on Thursday (May 22, 2025). Justice Christ said that Islam will remain Islam anywhere. The judge said this on the argument of the Center, stating that the Scheduled Tribe Muslim community living in the tribal area does not follow Islam as it is done in the rest of the country.

According to the report of the Bar and Bench, the bench of Chief Justice Bhushan Ramakrishna Gavai and Justice Augustin George Christ has been hearing the Waqf Act case for three consecutive days. In the third day hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said that under the new law, it is right to give protection to the lands of the Muslim community of Scheduled Tribes. He said that Scheduled Class people living in the tribal area have constitutional protection, which they have received due to valid reasons.

Center arguments over ST class Muslims
SG Tushar Mehta said, ‘Waqf means permanent dedication for God. Suppose I sold my land and found that the person of the Scheduled Tribe has been cheated, then the land can be refunded in this case, but the Waqf is irreversible. He said that the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) says that Muslims living in these tribal areas do not follow Islam like Muslims living in the rest of the country, they have their own cultural identity.

Justice Christ’s important comment on Islam
On this argument of SG Tushar Mehta, Justice AG Christ said, ‘Islam will remain Islam. Religion is the same anywhere. There may be a difference in cultural practices of those living in different parts. SG Mehta said, ‘I am just asking if it can be a basis for stopping the law?’

‘Land being grabbed in the name of Waqf’, said Tushar Mehta
The Solicitor General told the court that the tribal organizations have argued that they are being tortured and their land is being grabbed in the name of Waqf, is it not completely unconstitutional.

From Tuesday, the bench of the new CJI BR Gawai started hearing on the petitions filed to challenge the Waqf Amendment Act. Earlier, former Chief Justice Sanjeev Khanna was looking into the matter, but before retirement, he had transferred the case to the bench of Justice BR Gawai.

Also read:-
‘ED is breaking all limits …’, Know- In which case the Supreme Court made this comment

The Supreme Court has reserved the order on the issue of interim relief in the Waqf Amendment Act case. The bench of Chief Justice Bhushan Ramakrishna Gavai and Justice Augustin George Christ heard for 3 consecutive days. The court told the petitioners seeking a ban on the law that the law made from Parliament is considered constitutional till the final decision is taken. A very strong base will be required to stop its provisions.

On the first day of the hearing, 5 senior lawyers cross -examined the petitioner side. On the second and third day, the central government and some state governments responded. After this, once again about 2 hours the petitioner side spoke. Senior lawyers Kapil Sibal, Rajiv Dhawan, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Hujifa Ahmadi and CU Singh debated on behalf of the petitioners. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, mainly on behalf of the central government, presented the side. Senior lawyers Ranjit Kumar, Rakesh Dwivedi, Maninder Singh and Gopal Shankaranarayan made brief arguments in their support.

The petitioner side opposed things such as making the registration of Waqf by users mandatory, the government’s decision in the property dispute of the Waqf Board, making non -Muslims members members in the Waqf Board, the possibility of religious activity in ancient monuments, the condition of being a Muslim for 5 years and the Waqf Board on the tribal land to stop the Waqf Board. He was described as discrimination from Muslims and interference in religious matters.

On the other hand, the Central Government cited the law to enact a law after following the entire process on behalf of Parliament. The Center said that it would not be right to stop the sections of the law before the final hearing. Those who have brought the petition here are not personally affected. He is not a representative of the entire Muslim community. The law has been made in public interest. The discrepancies of the old Waqf law have been removed.

The government said that Waqf is not an essential part of Islam. It cannot be given the status like fundamental rights. The registration of Waqf by user was also kept necessary in the 1923 law. People who have not registered for 102 years, are still protesting. If the property is not their, then it should be used in social interest.

Earlier, only Muslims could do Waqf. But in the Waqf Act 2013, the provision of the property of non -Muslims was also made. To improve this, a condition has been laid for at least 5 years to be a Muslim. Constitution also gives protection to the land of tribals. The same has also been done in this law. Limited members in the Waqf Board will be non -Muslims, whose role will also be very limited. There will be no difference from new Waqf law on religious activities in ancient monuments.

Waqf Board claims on the entire village!
At the end of the hearing, a lawyer spoke about a village in Tamil Nadu in the court. He told that there is a 1500 -year -old temple in the village. Hindus have been living there for centuries. But the Waqf Board is claiming on the land of the entire village. This has also happened in other parts of the country. The new law gives legal solutions for such situations. Therefore, do not stop the court law.

Also read:-
WAQF Amendment Act: Debate in Waqf Amendment Act case completes, Supreme Court reserved decision

Waqf amendment act, 2025: On Wednesday (May 21, 2025), the Center presented its stand in the Supreme Court in hearing petitions filed to challenge the Waqf Amendment Act. The Center said that Waqf is an Islamic concept, but it is not an essential part of Islam. The Center also said that charity is part of every religion, but the Supreme Court says that this is not necessary for anyone.

On Tuesday, senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Rajiv Dhawan argued on behalf of the petitioners. Today, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared in the Supreme Court to present the side of the Center. In front of the bench of Chief Justice Bhushan Ramakrishna Gavai and Justice Augustin George Christ, SG Tushar Mehta responded to the objection of the petitioners, stating that the new Waqf law violates Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution.

According to the report of the Bar and Bench, SG Tushar Mehta said, “I did not know about this part of Islam until I did not do research that Waqf is an Islamic concept, but it is not an essential part of Islam.” He said that the concept of charity is present in every religion. Even in Christianity, but the Supreme Court says that this is not necessary for anyone. SG Tushar Mehta said that there are things like donating among Hindus and the same is in Sikhism, but in any religion it has not been said to be necessary.

SG Mehta said that if the financial situation of most people of the Muslim community is not very good and they are unable to do waqf, will they not be Muslims. This is a test conducted by the Supreme Court, to determine whether a practice is an essential religious practice. He said that it is not necessary to do charity in any religion, similarly there is Waqf in Islam.

SG Tushar Mehta said that Waqf by user is not a fundamental right. It was recognized by law in 1954 and before that in the Bengal Act. Referring to a decision, he said that if any right has been provided by law in the form of legislative policy, it can be taken away by the state forever.

Also read:-
SG Mehta spoke to the petitioners who questioned the Waqf Amendment Act- the law had a problem since 1923, you yourself …

During the hearing in the Supreme Court on Wednesday (May 21, 2025) on the petitions filed against the Waqf Amendment Act, the Center said that no petitioner is personally affected by the law. He said that only some people cannot become representatives of the entire Muslim community by filing a petition. He cannot say that the whole Muslim community also thinks the things they have problems.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared on behalf of the Center. He said that the Parliament enacted a law and made suggestions of millions of people before making laws. SG Mehta said that some people cannot call themselves representatives of the entire Muslim community and the Waqf law had been decreasing since 1923, which has been repaired.

The case was also heard on Tuesday, in which senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Rajiv Dhawan argued on behalf of the petitioners. Today, SG Tushar Mehta, while favoring the Center, said that from 1923 to 1995 law was the law that only Muslims could have walked, but before the elections in 2013, the law was made that anyone could do waqf. He said that the government has improved it and a condition has been placed to follow Islam for at least 5 years to wake up.

SG Tushar Mehta said, ‘If someone is using some place, he does not have paper in that place and claims that it is an unregistered Waqf by user. If the property is government in the government’s records, will it not be investigated? The petitioners had objected to the registration of the property in the hearing yesterday and said that where will the 100-200 year old Waqf papers come from,

On the plea of ​​SG Tushar Mehta, Chief Justice Bhushan Ramakrishna Gavai said that but the petitioners say that the government itself will investigate its claim. Tushar Mehta said, ‘Revenue officials will investigate the land revenue records. He will not decide any final ownership. The affected side has a way to go to court.

SG Mehta said that people had problems with the investigation of the collector, then another officer was decided. He will only amend the revenue record and amend. The CJI asked the SG that there would be an entry on paper only. Tushar Mehta said on the question of CJI Gavai, “Yes, if the government wants ownership, it will also file a civil case.”

The petitioners also had an objection to whether anyone could object to the property and then whether the property belongs to the government, it will also be decided by the government of the government. He said that as soon as the dispute on property starts, she will go to the government i.e. Waqf will not remain and if the board goes to court, then the property will remain the property of the government until the court comes to court.