The Waqf Act, initially enacted in 1954 and later revised in 1995, has become a subject of intense debate in India. This law, aimed at governing the administration of Muslim religious endowments, has granted sweeping powers to Waqf Boards, raising concerns about potential encroachment on the properties of other religious communities, particularly Hindus.
The Waqf Board’s Claim to the Marriott Hotel
In a startling case from Telangana, the state’s Waqf Board filed a petition in the Telangana High Court, claiming ownership over the renowned 5-star Marriott Hotel in Hyderabad. However, the court dismissed the petition and issued a writ, preventing the Waqf Tribunal from passing any adverse orders.
The Origins of the Dispute
The controversy surrounding the Marriott Hotel property dates back to 1958 when the Telangana Waqf Board initially conducted an inquiry under the Waqf Act of 1954. Through a resolution on October 5, 1958, it determined that the property in question was not a property. Despite this conclusion, numerous claims continued to surface over the years.
Legal Tussle and Court Intervention
In 1964, an individual named Abdul Gafoor filed a civil suit, claiming the property belonged to the Board. Despite legal challenges and court interventions, including a High Court order in 1968, the Waqf Board persisted with its claims. Notices were issued, and proceedings were initiated, with the most recent action occurring in 2014. Undeterred by previous court rulings and objections raised by the petitioners, the Waqf Board pursued the case, leading to the current legal battle.
The High Court’s Interim Order
Recognizing the immediacy and sensitivity of the matter, the Telangana High Court issued an interim order, restraining the Waqf Tribunal from passing any adverse decision against the petitioners during the ongoing proceedings. The court highlighted Section 27 of the Act, 1954, which empowers the Board to determine whether a property is a Waqf property or not.
The court stated, “In the present case, the Waqf Board conducted an inquiry under Section 27 of the 1954 Act and determined through a resolution dated 05.10.1958 that the subject property is not a Waqf property. Once a decision is taken under Section 27 of the 1954 Act that the subject property is not a Waqf, it would not be permissible for the Board to re-agitate this issue.”
The court further added, “The petitioners cannot be made to suffer legal injury merely because they have a statutory remedy available under the 1995 Act, particularly in a case where the initiation of the proceedings itself is in violation of the law.”
Consequently, the court quashed the show-cause notice issued by the Board and issued an injunction, directing the Board not to proceed with the eviction proceedings.
The Waqf Act: A Tool for Property Acquisition?
The Waqf Act, particularly after the 2013 amendments, has granted extensive powers to Boards to acquire properties without legal challenge. In 2014, the Congress party transferred 123 prime properties in Delhi to the Delhi Waqf Board, resulting in the loss of land for Hindus.
The Act now authorizes Boards to claim properties in the name of Muslim charity, stemming from property disputes between Hindus who migrated from Pakistan and Muslims who left India during the Partition.
Currently, there are over 8,54,509 properties under Waqf Boards, covering more than eight lakh acres of land. The Boards have significantly expanded their property holdings over the years, often considering land surrounding cemeteries and illegal shrines as their property, leading to encroachments.
Controversial Provisions
Section 3 of the Act, 1995 allows the Board to claim land based solely on its “thinking” without requiring any proof. If the Board claims a property, the owner cannot go to court but must approach the Waqf Tribunal Court. Section 85 of the Act makes the Tribunal’s decision final, unchallengeable even by the Supreme Court. Additionally, Section 40 shifts the burden of proof to the landowner, making it extremely difficult to contest the Board’s claims.
Constitutional Concerns
The existence of the Act in a secular country like India has raised constitutional concerns, as it gives special rights to one religious group. Remarkably, many Muslim countries do not have equivalent Waqf Boards or Waqf Laws. Some argue that the Act in India should be repealed, as it is seen as unconstitutional.
The Waqf Act has ignited a heated debate in India, with concerns about its potential misuse for land acquisition and encroachment on the properties of other religious communities. As the legal battle over the Marriott Hotel in Telangana continues, it highlights the need for a comprehensive review of the Act, ensuring fairness, transparency, and adherence to constitutional principles of secularism and equality.