The <keyword id="19916814" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Modi-government" source="keywords">Modi government</keyword> today tabled the <keyword id="20279538" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="waqf" source="keywords">Waqf</keyword> (Amendment Bill), 2024, in the parliament, proposing over 40 sweeping <keyword id="19960364" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="amendments" source="keywords">amendments</keyword> to the existing <keyword id="20776329" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="Waqf-Act" source="keywords">Waqf Act</keyword>, which range from the DC (district collectors) being the mediator in determining whether or not a property belongs to the Waqf board, and increased representation for <keyword id="19943278" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Muslim-women" source="keywords">Muslim women</keyword> in Waqf boards, and more. Here's all you need to know about the Waqf Act 1995, which was last amended in 2013. The Waqf board came into existence post-independence, when the government gave it control of properties which were previously owned by Muslims in India, but were now vacant, since their owners had migrated to newly-created Pakistan. <h2>New bill to bring greater accountability </h2>One of the central objectives of this amendment bill is to curtail the disproportionately arbitrary powers that the Waqf board currently wields. At present, India has 32 Waqf boards, including two for Shia Muslims in UP and Bihar. Under the current act, the Waqf board can claim any property as their own, without having to undertake any prior or compulsory verifications. In other words, if they believe that the land belongs to waqf, that itself is deemed sufficient for them to claim ownership. Interestingly, the person donating or holding such property need not be a practising Muslim, but can also be someone of sound body and mind, who believes in Islam. Moreover, in case the Waqf board takes over your property, the incidence of proving that it is indeed, your property lies with the land owner i.e. you, and not with the Waqf board. <h2>What is Waqf? </h2>Any immovable or movable property that has been dedicated or donated by an individual for the purposes that are seen as pious and religious in Islam is known as Waqf. Think of this as an endowment or trust made for religious purposes, or for causes noted sacrosanct in Muslim Law. Per WAMSI's website (Waqf Asset Management System of India), which is managed by ministry of minority affairs, around 8,72,324 immovable properties, and 16,713 movable properties have been classified as Waqf. With 2,17,161 immovable properties under its management, the U.P. Sunni Central Board of Waqfs hold the maximum number of properties amidst all state and UT waqf boards. Most waqf properties (around 1,50,516) have been designated to be used as graveyards, followed by agricultural land (1,40,784) and mosques (1,19,200). While Waqf refers to a single such property, Auqaf refers to the multiple such properties and assets, which have been deemed as Waqf. The one who donates towards such causes is known as a Waqif. Once a property has been deemed as Waqf, its status cannot be changed ever, since the property is deemed to be donated to Allah. This also means that Waqf properties cannot ever be sold, either by the property's custodian, also known as mutawwali, nor by the owner or the board themselves. At present, Waqf Boards are the third largest landowners in the country, right behind Indian Railways and the Army. Waqf boards across the country cumulatively hold and manage around 8.7 lakh properties, which span over 9.4 lakh acres. <h2>What are the changes proposed?</h2>Most significantly, the bill aims to omit section 40 of the act, which gives absolute power to the Waqf boards to decide whether a property belongs to the Waqf board or not. If the bill is passed, the district collector (DC) will serve as the judge in deciding whether a property can be registered as Waqf or not. The DC will also serve as focal point of dispute resolution for issues related to the Waqf Act. Presently, appeals against the Waqf board have to pass through a tribunal, which itself is made up of members of the Waqf board. The decision of this tribunal is final, and can only be challenged if the high courts themselves command the board to do as stated. Moreover, in some states, there exists no tribunals, making the Waqf board as the ultimate authority. Additionally, these tribunals do not have any specific timeline within which they should resolve the disputes, which means that the grievance redressal process could stretch for years. If the bill is passed, it will be up to the DC to check the validity and correctness of the application that has been submitted for any property that is to be registered as Waqf, and then submit a report to them. The idea behind the amendments is to streamline how Waqfs are registered, by means of a central database. Moreover, any appeals against the tribunal's order will be contestable in high courts, within 90 days of passing of such orders. The act will be renamed Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act, 1995, and will have scope for increased representation of various backward Muslim communities such as <keyword id="22713004" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Shias" source="keywords">Shias</keyword>. It also proposes creation of an altogether separate "Auqaf" board for Bohras and Aghakhanis. The bill also proposes that no property would be deemed waqf solely by way of use. At present, even in the absence of waqfnama or valid documents, a property is considered to be waqf, provided it is being used for causes such as being a mosque etc. Under the new bill, any property that does not have a waqfnama will not be automatically considered a waqf property. Additionally, at present, when it comes to Waqf-alal-aulad, or private wakf, which is created solely for the benefit of a particular group of people and thereafter, its descendants, only the male heir, or eldest son can become the mutawwali after the death of the owner of the property. Women and female descendants are not accorded the same rights. The rules also state that once there are no direct descendants or heirs left to lay claim this private wakf, the monetary gains from the same will automatically be transferred to the Waqf board. hat is created for the benefit of a specific group of people, such as a family or descendants. It is also known as wakf-ul-aaulad. The proceeds from a private waqf are used to serve the beneficiaries.

Waaqif with the Waqf Act? Here's all you need to know

A Waqf is a body recognized by Muslim Law, the Sharia, which owns and manages properties donated for a religious purpose. They are regulated earlier under the Waqf Act of 1954, and now under the Waqf Act of 1995, approved by the Indian Parliament. <keyword id="1037861" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Waqf-Boards">Waqf Boards</keyword> have perpetual succession and they have power to acquire and hold property. In the <keyword id="6354931" type="LOCATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Ayodhya">Ayodhya</keyword> title dispute⁠— Ram temple versus Babri Masjid⁠— there are two Waqf Boards involved. One of them represents the Sunni sect and the other represents the Shia sect. The Sunni Waqf Board has spearheaded the claims of the Muslim community’s appeal from 1960s. In 1961, the state government had seized control of the disputed site through the Faizabad court verdict. The Sunni Waqf Board wanted control over the mosque and the removal of the idols inside, which were reportedly placed under the mosque’s dome in on December 22, 1949. The <keyword id="48834" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Allahabad-High-Court">Allahabad High Court</keyword> ordered in 2010 that the disputed land should be divided into three parts and one part should go to the Sunni Waqf Board⁠— the other two parts must go to the Hindu sides represented by Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla Virajman (the deity). But the Waqf Board wants the entire land and the mosque to be restored as it was before its demolition in 1992. Shia vs Sunni The Shia Waqf Board has claimed ownership of the disputed land, not the Sunni Waqf Board. Babur, who is said to have built a mosque in the disputed site, was from the Shia sect among Muslims. However, the Shia WAQF Board has supported the construction of Ram temple at the site where the mosque (<keyword id="43572" type="LOCATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Babri-Masjid">Babri Masjid</keyword>) stood earlier. In return, the Shia Waqf Board has demanded that the government must give an alternative site for the mosque construction.

The Waqf Boards and their stance on the Ayodhya dispute awaiting Supreme Court verdict

More than a century-old religious dispute⁠— the first case was filed in 1885⁠— became a land title suit is awaiting the final word from India’s Supreme Court, which is expected to give its verdict in the Ram Temple-Babri Masjid (mosque) dispute in <keyword id="6354931" type="LOCATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Ayodhya">Ayodhya</keyword> very soon. The Hindu sides contend there should be a temple for Lord Rama in the 2.7 acre land because one was destroyed for construction of the <keyword id="43572" type="LOCATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Babri-Masjid">Babri Masjid</keyword> in the 16th century. The dispute continued escalating until December 6, 1992 when the mosque was demolished by those who wanted a temple. As it stood at the Supreme Court, there are 50 parties in the case but the broad issue is whether there should be a temple or a mosque in the disputed site or should the land be divided among the sparring parties as ruled by the Allahabad High Court in 2010. 
 <div type="Youtube" id="-tpuk6l1GVE" title="What is the Ayodhya Dispute?" thumbUrl="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/-tpuk6l1GVE/mqdefault.jpg"></div>



 The Allahabad High Court divided the Ayodhya title into three equal parts between the Nirmohi Akhara, Lord Ram the deity represented by Triloki Nath Pandey (an RSS volunteer and Vishva Hindu Parishad functionary), and the Sunni Waqf Board. The appeals at the Supreme Court are against this verdict and the contentions of all 50 parties to the case can be subsumed in the claims of the three primary parties to the case who got parts of the land in the High Court case. Ram Lalla Virajman Interestingly, the reference to Ram Lalla Virajman is to the deity of Lord Rama, represented by a human, legally called ‘next friend’, Trilok Nath Pandey, a member of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad. Both in India and the UK courts, there are legal precedents that have accepted deities as juristic entities in the past. The primary claims of Ram Lalla are as follows: <ul><li>Decree of declaration stating that the entire site (building and adjacent area) belongs to the deity.</li><li>Perpetual injunction against the defendants, prohibiting them from interfering in any manner in the construction of a new temple under the trusteeship of the Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas.</li><li>The representative of Ram Lalla is opposed to the division of the land title as it holds that the deity is indivisible.</li></ul>Nirmohi Akhara The Nirmohi Akhara is a math (a monastery) for ascetic devotees of Lord Rama. The Akhara claims to be existence since at least 1400 AD, according to some accounts, and that it has been managing the temple much before the construction of the mosque. With the current appeal at the Supreme Court, the Akhara wants the management and control of the temple back in its hands. For that, the Court has to first agree that a temple can be built there. The Akhara only came into the national spotlight in 1959 when it moved the court against the transfer of control of the disputed site to the state government. That 1959 lawsuit was borne out of incident on December 22, 1949 when a set of Hindu idols were placed under the dome of the Babri Masjid. But the Akhara has claimed that those idols were always there. <ul><li>stay the operation of the High Court's judgment that granted the three-domed structure to the Sunni Waqf Board and Shri Ram Virajman</li><li>Allow pooja (worships and rituals) of Lord Rama at the site and bar anyone from removing the deities as directed by the Supreme Court in the 1993 judgement.</li></ul>Gopal Singh Visharad Gopal Singh Visharad is an individual who moved the Faizabad court in 1950 demanding his right to worship at the disputed site saying his ancestors had been doing so before the mosque was established. Later that year, another appellant, Paramhans Ram Chandra Das, filed a suit seeking permission for "worship and darshan without any check, obstruction or interference". The Faizabad civil judge consolidated the suits filed by Visharad and Das and in the final verdict handed the disputed site over to the state government, which is when the Nirmohi Akhara jumped into the court battle demanding rights over the land. The Sunni Central Board of Waqfs A Waqf is a body recognized by Muslim Law, the Sharia, which owns and manages properties donated for a religious purpose. They are regulated earlier under the Waqf Act of 1954, and now under the Waqf Act of 1995, approved by the Indian Parliament. In the Ayodhya dispute, the Sunni Waqf Board has spearheaded the claims of the Muslim community from 1961, after the state government had seized control through the Faizabad court verdict. The Board wanted control over the mosque and the removal of the idols inside. The consolidation of the three cases⁠— Visharad, Das, and the Sunni Waqf Board⁠— became the main case in 1964. After the demolition of the Babri Masjid by kar sevaks, members of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, in 1992, the Waqf Board sought to get the mosque restored. After 2010, the Board appealed at the Supreme Court against the division of the disputed site into three parts by the Allahabad High Court. Shia WAQF Board Interestingly, despite being a Muslim organisation, the Shia Waqf Board (representing a sect) has supported the cause for a temple at the disputed site in Ayodhya and sought that the Muslim parties should give up their claim. The Shia Waqf Board has claimed ownership of the disputed land, not the Sunni Waqf Board. Babur, who is said to have built the mosque in the disputed site, was from the Shia sect among Muslims. The Shia Waqf Board has appealed that the Supreme Court must hand over the part of land that was given to the Sunni Waqf Board, by the Allahabad High Court verdict, to the Hindu parties. In return, the Shia Waqf Board has demanded that the Babri Masjid must be rebuilt in another site. See also: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/politics/news/a-curious-rift-emerges-in-sunni-waqf-board-a-party-to-ayodhya-case-ahead-of-a-verdict/articleshow/71681803.cms">A curious rift emerges in Sunni Waqf Board-a party to Ayodhya case-ahead of a verdict</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/politics/news/ayodhya-issue-days-ahead-of-a-verdict-muslim-parties-refuse-mediation-and-settlement/articleshow/71646131.cms">Ayodhya issue: Days ahead of a verdict, Muslim parties refuse mediation and settlement</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/politics/news/lawyer-tears-up-pictoral-map-as-courtroom-drama-peaks-on-the-last-day-of-ayodhya-arguments/articleshow/71613741.cms">Lawyer tears up pictoral map as courtroom drama peaks on the last day of Ayodhya arguments</a>

You Searched For "Waqf Act" and got 3 results

Waaqif with the Waqf Act? Here's all you need to know

Ira Alok Puranik

The Waqf Boards and their stance on the Ayodhya dispute awaiting Supreme Court verdict

BI India Bureau

The Ayodhya case has 50 parties⁠— but you need to know only these 7 claims

BI India Bureau