YSR Congress Party Moves Supreme Court Against Waqf Amendment Act

The Yuvajana Sramika Rythu Congress Party (YSRCP) has approached the Supreme Court challenging the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 on the ground that its provisions violate Articles 13, 14, 15, 21, 25, 26, 29, 30 and 300A of the Constitution of India.

According to the party led by former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister YS Jagan Mohan Reddy, the amendment fundamentally weakens administration of waqfs, erodes the original legislative intent of the 1995 Act, and facilitates large-scale government interference in Muslim religious endowments.

Notably, a bench of CJI Sanjiv Khanna, Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice KV Viswanathan will be hearing 10 petitions relating to the Waqf (Amendment) Act on April 16. These are filed by AIMIM MP Asaduddin Owaisi, Delhi AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan, Association for Protection of Civil Rights, Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind President Arshad Madani, Samastha Kerala Jamiatul Ulema, Anjum Kadari, Taiyyab Khan Salmani, Mohammad Shafi, Mohammad Fazlurrahim and RJD MP Manoj Kumar Jha.

In its plea, YSRCP asserts that the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 introduces sweeping changes, including the elimination of “waqf by user,” the imposition of non-Muslim members in Waqf governance bodies, and the conferral of far-reaching powers on government officials to reclassify or seize waqf properties. It also narrows who may create a waqf (requiring a formal deed and a showing that the waqif has practiced Islam for 5 years), removes the requirement that the CEO of a Waqf Board be a Muslim, and grants administrative bodies the power to strip properties of their waqf status upon the mere assertion that such properties belong to the government, the Party says.

YSRCP further highlights that the new sections (such as Sections 3D and 3E) threaten to invalidate even longstanding waqf declarations if the property is claimed to be a “protected monument” or a “protected area,” and deprive members of Scheduled Tribes of the right to create waqfs at all if they convert to Islam.

"the Amendment Act imposes intrusive government control on Muslim endowments, thereby, discriminating on the basis of religion in violation of Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India. It dismantles denominational autonomy enshrined in Article 26, infringes on the property rights of a minority community protected by Article 300A, and disregards constitutional safeguards intended to protect minority cultures (Articles 29 and 30) and personal dignity (Article 21)."

Elimination of concept of “Waqf by User" is arbitrary and unconstitutional

One of the most radical changes brought in, YSRCP avers, is the elimination of the concept of “waqf by user”. It underlines that Indian courts have accepted that where a property has long been used by the Muslim community for religious or pious purposes, it acquires the status of a waqf, even absent a formal deed. However, by deleting sub-clause (i) from Section 3(r), which recognized waqf by user, the Amendment Act imposes a requirement of a formal deed.

"This legislative shift jeopardizes a “major percentage of existing waqfs,” many of which predate formal registration and rely on usage-based dedication. By eliminating waqf by user, the Amendment Act opens these age-old religious institutions to indefinite challenges or claims by private or governmental authorities."

The petition states that coupled with the new requirement of having a deed, the removal of "waqf by user" places ancient mosques, graveyards, and dargahs at risk of losing their waqf status.

Removal of Muslims from key positions in Central Waqf Council and State Waqf Boards

Another significant change, the petitioner points out, has been brought in through amended Sections 9 and 14, which require that 2 of the members appointed to Waqf bodies (like Central Waqf Council and State Waqf boards), excluding ex-officio members, shall be non-Muslims.

"By mandating non-Muslims in bodies exclusively dealing with a Muslim charitable trust, the Act undermines denominational autonomy guaranteed by Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution...the original 1995 Act's requirement in Section 23 that the CEO of a Waqf Board “shall be a Muslim” existed to ensure administrative decisions are informed by an understanding of Islamic law and tradition. Abrogating this requirement hinders the community's capacity to govern its own religious properties, violating Article 26(b)."

The petition also points out that over decades, Indian legislation gradually expanded the protective framework for waqfs, culminating in the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2013. The creation of specialized Waqf Tribunals, heightened penalties for encroachment, recognition of Waqf by user, and the requirement of predominantly Muslim membership in Waqf Boards were progressive steps ensuring that the religious essence of waqf is preserved. However, the new amendments tantamount to wholesale removal of existing rights.

Removal of limitation for challenging Waqf notifications

YSRCP states that the pre-amendment framework established a time limit (initially 1 year, extended to 1 year from the date of knowledge in certain contexts) to challenge the listing or notification of Waqf property. Per contra, the new amendment provides that challenges can be filed beyond 2 years if “sufficient cause” is shown, effectively "abolishing" any "meaningful limitation period".

"This indefinite re-opening fosters uncertainty and instability, as Waqf institutions must constantly remain on guard for potential lawsuits. The Petitioners humbly submit that it also invites harassing and vexatious litigation, particularly if the property is valuable or of strategic importance, effectively weakening the philanthropic character of Waqf by forcing administrators to commit time and resources to repeated litigation."

Excessive executive control in Waqf administration

According to the petitioner, the Amendment Act, by vesting wide powers in the government to appoint or dominate the membership, effectively places Waqf administration under the direct or indirect control of the State. "The Petitioners humbly submit that through the Amendment Act, the Government not only “regulates” but also “restructures” Waqf bodies to the extent that the original Muslim majority is lost or significantly reduced, leading to a scenario of partial or full State hegemony over a religious endowment."

The petition has been filed through AoR Mahfooz Ahsan Nazki.

Case Title: Yuvajana Sramika Rythu Congress Party and Anr. v. Unioin of India