top of page
Search

Who Guards the Amendments? Parliament's Mandate vs Judicial Overreach in the Waqf Act Debate

This Is Not Just Another Legal Dispute

April 2025. The Supreme Court of India proposes an interim order to protect properties already declared as waqf—even before the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2024 (U.M.E.E.D. Act) is fully


Implemented. It seems procedural. But it isn’t. This is not about land alone. It is about power, precedent, and priorities.

The core issue:

Can the judiciary stall a democratically passed amendment that seeks to undo historical abuse, even before it’s tested on the ground?

As a practising advocate, I ask this respectfully, but firmly: Where was this urgency when the original Waqf Act was weaponised to dispossess Hindus, encroach on public land, and silence lawful ownership with clerical fiat?


As A Lawyer, A Nationalist, A Son of This Soil

I have full faith in our judiciary. I wear the black coat with pride. But that same black coat demands I speak when the balance of power is disturbed.

For years, millions of acres were declared waqf under vague claims of historical usage. No notice. No hearing. No proof. Farmers, labourers, mandir caretakers, railway departments—branded as illegal occupiers overnight.

Where was the suo motu action then? Why did courts not strike down an Act that allowed religious authorities to override property laws, ignore natural justice, and operate a parallel legal system?

And now, when Parliament corrects this injustice through constitutional means, after full debate, the judiciary suddenly wakes up to caution?

Respectfully, this caution is misplaced. Justice delayed was tolerated. But justice interrupted cannot be.


What the Waqf Amendment Really Does

Let’s be clear: the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2024 is not about targeting any community. It is about restoring constitutional parity.

Here’s what this amendment achieves:

  • Ends "waqf by user" – no more property grab by oral history.

  • Requires proper documentation and title proof for any waqf claim.

  • Bars waqf claims over government land—schools, hospitals, army land, temples, municipal spaces.

  • Transfers survey power to District Collectors, not religious boards.

  • Introduces digital transparency through public portals.

  • Includes non-Muslim members in oversight bodies for balance.

This is not communal. This is constitutional clean-up.


The Judicial Freeze – What the Supreme Court Proposed

On April 16, 2025, during hearings, the Supreme Court considered an interim order suggesting:

Properties already declared as waqf, whether by court or by user, shall not be disturbed pending final judgment.

Let’s unpack that.

  • The Court seeks to protect previously declared waqf properties, many of which were questionably classified.

  • This freezes Parliament’s reform—before it even takes effect.

But the bigger concern is timing. This Act hasn’t harmed anyone yet. It hasn’t dispossessed any legal owner. It hasn’t been misused. So what is being stayed?

This is not judicial review. This is judicial preview—and that has no place in a democracy.



What the Constitution Actually Says

Let’s turn to the Grantha of our democracy—the Constitution of India:

  • Article 245–246: Parliament has the power to legislate on land, property, and religion.

  • Article 122: Courts cannot question legislative procedure.

  • Article 14: Equality before law. The Waqf Act violated this by letting one religious board bypass standard land laws.

  • Article 31A: Gives Parliament powers for land reform.

  • Article 27: Bars use of public funds to promote any religion.

What part of this amendment violates these Articles? None.

The courts are there to test a law’s effects, not block its introduction. There is zero constitutional basis to halt implementation unless proven otherwise.



Judicial Restraint Is Not Weakness. It Is Wisdom.

Landmark judgments have repeatedly urged judicial restraint:

  • Natural Resource Allocation, In Re: "Courts assess the process, not the policy."

  • Suganmal v. State of MP: Courts must not step into legislative shoes.

"Judicial overreach is the fastest route to public backlash!!" 

We are not questioning the Court's power. We are questioning the premature exercise of that power.

The courts are not the only guardians of democracy. Parliament too carries the weight of 140 crore voices.


Fixing History Requires Legislative Spine, Not Judicial Screens

Every society must reckon with its past. But that reckoning must be done through law, not lawsuits.

Parliament debated this Act. Both Houses passed it. It received Presidential assent. Seven states supported it. What more constitutional sanctity does one need?

When land laws become captive to community pressure, we don’t get justice. We get paralysis.

When reform is blocked before rollout, we don’t get review. We get regression.

If courts set a precedent where every historic correction must be pre-approved judicially, what next?

  • Will CAA implementation be stayed?

  • Will Article 370 repeal be held back?

  • Will temple restitution laws need prior PIL clearance?

That is not how a Republic runs.


Why Didn’t Courts Act When Bharat Bled?

Let me ask this bluntly.

When poor farmers lost land to waqf notices overnight—where was the court? When railway land in Maharashtra was labelled waqf—where was the PIL activism? When Hindus were declared encroachers on ancestral homes—where was the urgency?

The silence then is in stark contrast to the activism now. This is what angers the public. Not that the court acts—but whenit chooses to act.

Respectfully, the judiciary must ask itself: Why did we not intervene when injustice was becoming institutional?

This blog, this debate, this moment—it’s not anti-court. It’s pro-accountability.


Final Word: Let the Law Speak First

We are at a turning point in India’s legal evolution. The Parliament is correcting laws that once favoured opacity and privilege.

This is not the time for procedural speed-breakers. This is the time for judicial maturity.

Let Parliament legislate. Let the law operate. Let the judiciary test it if needed—after, not before.

History won’t forgive us if we let one more reform die in the court corridors of indecision.


From the Heart of Bharat

🧠 Read the Waqf Amendment Act. 📜 Know your constitutional rights. 📣 Speak up when historical wrongs are being righted. 📩 Share this article with your MP, your MLA, your legal group.

Let us defend the right of Parliament to amend what was once wrong.

Because Justice Delayed is Tolerable. But Justice Blocked is Betrayal.




 
 
 

Comments

bottom of page