By Vansh Aggarwal
Introduction:
“Public policy is not about choosing between right and wrong but about navigating between competing rights.”
India’s waqf system, rooted in Islamic jurisprudence, refers to the permanent dedication of movable or immovable property for religious, pious, or charitable purposes. These waqf properties, spread across the country, play a pivotal role in sustaining community welfare, such as education, healthcare, and social relief, especially for marginalised populations. However, in recent decades, the waqf sector has faced increasing scrutiny over opaque administration, allegations of encroachments, and property mismanagement.
It is in this context that the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 was introduced, aiming to overhaul the regulatory framework governing waqf properties. The amendment seeks to improve transparency, inclusivity, and accountability, sparking both appreciation and apprehension. This article analyses the Act not merely as a legislative measure but as a public policy intervention, assessing how it aligns with broader governance principles, safeguards property rights, and balances community interests within the constitutional framework.
Understanding the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025:
The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, introduces several significant changes to the governance and regulation of waqf properties in India, with the central aim of promoting transparency, curbing arbitrariness, and improving accountability. Among the most talked-about changes is the removal of Section 40 of the original Waqf Act, 1995, which had previously allowed Waqf Boards to declare any property as waqf land unilaterally. This provision had long been criticised for allowing opaque decision-making and for creating grounds for disputes, especially in cases where private or public land was declared waqf without the knowledge of affected parties.
Another notable amendment is the inclusion of a public objection mechanism that enables individuals from any religious community to raise objections regarding a property’s classification as waqf. This move, which departs from earlier frameworks that limited such recourse to specific groups, is intended to democratise the process and protect broader public interest. Additionally, the Act places strong emphasis on the digitisation of waqf records, including land surveys and GIS-based mapping, thereby reducing the risk of overlapping claims and aiding efficient administration.
As per official press releases from the Press Information Bureau (PIB), the government argues that these amendments are not aimed at religious control but rather at streamlining property governance in line with broader public policy objectives. The reforms are designed to eliminate ‘administrative loopholes’ and to create institutional safeguards, such as assigning District Magistrates a larger role in resolving land disputes, making the process more structured and accountable. The 2025 Amendment reflects a policy shift toward transparent land governance and equitable redressal mechanisms, even within religious endowment structures.
Public Policy Dimensions of the Amendment:
One of the major public policy gains lies in the digitisation of waqf records and mandatory third-party audits, which aim to curb longstanding issues of encroachment, manipulation, and unauthorised use of waqf land. These measures reflect a conscious shift toward a data-driven governance model, consistent with broader state efforts to digitise land records and reduce litigation. As noted in the Press Information Bureau’s release, the mapping of waqf properties using GIS technology will help prevent duplication, fraudulent claims, and ensure that such lands are used for the charitable and religious purposes for which they were intended.
Another public policy milestone is the expansion of the objection mechanism to include individuals from any religious community, not just Muslims. This broadens the participatory nature of waqf governance and addresses long-standing concerns about exclusivity in religious administrative bodies. It also aligns with the constitutional vision of equality before the law and fosters a more inclusive system of land governance, moving beyond sectarian limitations.
Impact on Property Rights and Legal Certainty:
Property disputes involving waqf land have historically been fraught with legal ambiguities, often leading to protracted litigation and encroachments. In several past instances, such as Board of Muslim Wakfs, Rajasthan v. Radha Kishan, the courts have grappled with the challenge of balancing waqf board assertions over land with the claims of citizens or public bodies. A recurring concern has been the lack of procedural safeguards in determining whether a particular parcel of land is waqf property, often leaving third parties vulnerable to sudden claims.
The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, addresses these concerns by introducing procedural clarity and participatory checks in land classification. By removing Section 40, the amendment takes away the unilateral power of waqf boards to declare any land as waqf, thereby protecting the rights of third-party stakeholders, including private landowners, government institutions, and businesses. This contributes significantly to legal certainty, a cornerstone of any secure property rights regime.
Social Welfare vs. Religious Autonomy:
Waqf institutions have historically played a vital role in community welfare, especially in providing services related to education, healthcare, and relief for the poor. Many of these endowments were created to ensure long-term support for marginalised sections within the Muslim community, making them essential instruments of both religious practice and social upliftment. However, the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 has prompted criticism from several Muslim organisations and boards, who argue that the increased oversight and procedural restrictions amount to state overreach into matters of religious autonomy.
From a public policy perspective, this presents a delicate challenge: how to balance welfare delivery with constitutional commitments to secularism and minority rights. The state must tread carefully to avoid the perception that regulatory reforms are aimed at diluting the religious character of waqf institutions. Yet, the central rebuttal remains that transparency and procedural safeguards do not erode religious freedoms; rather, they ensure that waqf institutions function by their charitable mandate and enjoy greater public trust.
Constitutional and Federal Considerations:
The regulation of waqf properties falls under Entry 10 of the Concurrent List, which allows both the Centre and the States to legislate on charitable and religious endowments. However, the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 has sparked debates over policy centralisation, as it empowers the Centre to play a more direct role in waqf administration through mechanisms like digitised monitoring and uniform procedures. Some state waqf boards have expressed concerns that such central oversight may dilute local autonomy, potentially infringing upon the spirit of cooperative federalism.
This tension between national uniformity and regional flexibility raises constitutional questions that may be tested in courts, particularly concerning the extent of the Union’s powers in matters traditionally managed at the state level. While the Act aims at streamlining governance and reducing discrepancies, any perceived erosion of state authority could invite legal challenges, further complicating Centre-State relations. Nonetheless, if harmonised effectively, the amendment can serve as a model for integrated governance in religious and charitable matters without compromising federal balance.
Challenges and Criticisms:
The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, has not been without its share of criticism and controversy. Several opposition parties and Muslim organisations, notably the Kerala Waqf Board, have alleged that the Act may be a political tool designed to facilitate land reclassification or subtly target minority institutions under the guise of reform. They argue that empowering non-waqf individuals to object to waqf listings could open the door to majoritarian interference in religious institutions, potentially undermining minority rights.
However, the Union maintains that waqf properties, while religious in origin, serve public functions and should be administered with accountability mechanisms that apply to all public charitable assets. The broader challenge, then, is to allay fears of selective targeting while reinforcing the idea that procedural fairness strengthens rather than weakens religious institutions in a democratic and pluralistic society.
Conclusion:
The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 is fundamentally aimed at introducing better regulation and transparency in the administration of waqf properties, rather than interfering with religious practices. It reflects an evolving public policy framework where communal interests must align with broader constitutional values, such as transparency, inclusivity, and legal certainty. While concerns about political misuse or religious marginalisation are valid and deserve attention, the amendment also opens a path for restructuring waqf governance in line with democratic ideals.
Going forward, the government must continue dialogue with religious and community stakeholders to ensure fair and balanced implementation of the law. Such engagement can bridge trust deficits and prevent alienation. Ultimately, the Waqf (Amendment) Act should be viewed not through the lens of identity politics but as a step toward robust public governance, where religious institutions are held to the same standards of accountability as any other public trust.
Author’s Bio: Vansh Vijay Aggarwal is a B.A. LL.B. student at Jindal Global Law School and a columnist at CNES.
NICKELED AND DIMED 