The Waqf Act Politicizing Indian Muslims
A question of autonomy or centralization?
by Azeemah Saleem*
The history of Waqf endowment in India is as old as the presence of Islam in the Indian subcontinent. With the arrival of the Mughal Empire, successive Muslim sultans have been very generous in funding waqf councils from as early as the thirteenth century (Ansari, 1974). Thus, the waqf grew at unprecedented levels.
The waqf was managed by the Mughal Empire, promoting mosques and educational and religious institutions in the society. However, in the eighteenth century, after the collapse of the Mughal Empire and the establishment of the British Empire, the existing waqf civil institution, along with other Islamic institutions, fell into disarray. Furthermore, following the independence, the Indian government passed the 1954 Waqf Act for directing and managing the vast Waqf property sustained in the post-independence India region. Moreover, the act was adopted to keep any political interference and illegal exploitation at a distance. In Muslim societies, the institution of waqf has been considered the foundation block of social infrastructure and plays a significant role in the socio-economic, religious, and cultural development of the society, such as education, healthcare, and public welfare.
In India, 'Waqf' institutions are categorised into central and state. The central waqf council was set up by the Ministry of Minority Affairs in 1964 as an advisory body for the central government on the matter concerning the working of the waqf board, while the state waqf board was established by the state government to assess all waqf assets in those states. However, with the consistent increasing discontent among the Indian Muslims against the functioning of Waqf, it resulted in repealing the Waqf Act 1954, and the New Waqf Act 1995 was passed, giving more power to the Waqf board and focusing on democratising the procedure and workings of the Waqf management (Rashid 2005). Furthermore, the role of the council expanded significantly under the provision of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2013. The council issued a directive to the state board to furnish information to the council on the performance of the board, particularly financial performance, surveys, revenue records, encroachment of Waqf properties, and annual and audit reports under Section 9(4) of the act. Thus, providing absolute autonomy in all matters related to property by the board. By 2006, according to the Sachar Committee, the total market value of the waqf board in India encompassed 60 billion Indian rupees. As a result, the waqf board is now the third largest owner of the land after the Indian Armed Forces and the Indian Railways. The widespread undermined administration and mismanaged waqf properties have not only questioned the functioning of the waqf board but also opened up the debate on its constitutional validity by the majority.
Despite huge property ownership by a specific community (officially meant for community development), which caused immense exploitation, discrimination, and underutilization of the properties. Thus questioned the transparency, accountability, and constitutional validity of the board. the unchecked discrimination and exploitation associated with the negligence of the Mutawallis (Waqf board members). How the member endowed waqf property as their personal property, mainly using it for their ulterior motive and self-enrichment. If the properties had been utilised, they would have generated a minimum return of 10 per cent, which would amount approximately to 1200 billion Indian rupees per annum (Sachar Committee 2006).
The waqf board is usually state-controlled, undermining the Muslim community at the ground level as a decision-maker in the community development. Under Indian law, waqf property cannot be transferred or sold and must be used for the community’s welfare. The board is allowed to conduct an independent inquiry into the ownership of the property that claimed its belongingness. The decision seems to be final, unless revoked by the specific order of the tribunal. Furthermore, the legality is not clearly determined by the Waqf Tribunal, its sectarian committee compositions, and its juxtaposition with the Indian Government Land Acquisition Acts. Moreover, the appeals to the orders of the tribunals are not maintainable in the Indian Court of Law. Such provisions questioned the right of the citizen to seek constitutional remedies in case of gross violation of natural justice. As a result, the widespread undermined administration and mismanaged waqf properties have not only questioned the functioning of the waqf board but also opened up the debate on its constitutional validity by the majority.
The weak institutional infrastructure, lack of skilled personnel and digitisation, political apathy and the absence of community participation and accountability mechanisms have always been under scrutiny by the current government. The implementation of the Waqf Board Act 2025 was a consequence of such exploitation; however, the act remains deeply contentious rather than a reform.
The Waqf Board Act 2025 has provided a mechanism for transparency and efficiency through the digitalisation of records, audits, and appeals, along with inclusive governance such as representation of women, sects, and professionals seeking to democratise the board. It has also provided few tools for reclaiming the waqf property. However, state overreach by granting the district officer the power to determine Waqf ownership undermines its autonomy. The lack of Islamic principles and inclusion of non-Muslim stakeholders not only undermine religious doctrine but also limit the central autonomy of the Waqf board. As a result, the limited representation undermines the inclusion of the Muslim community on the board and can result in the construction of a long-standing waqf board.
The politicisation of the allocation of waqf properties and resources in one hand, questioning the equal treatment of all citizens under the law. And on the other hand, scholars like Bhargava (2013) emphasised the importance of recognising and respecting religious diversity within the secular framework, advocating a balanced approach that addresses the concerns of both the secular state and religious communities. The politicisation of Waqf Boards in India reflects broader issues of minority management, institutional erosion, and patron-client politics. Thus, it dilutes minority religious autonomy, opens waqfs to state dominance, and risks further communal tension.
*Dr Azeemah Saleem is an Assistant Professor at the Center for Communication and Critical Thinking at JK Lakshmipat University, Jaipur. Her research findings have been published in Sage, Routledge, Political Book Review, Refugee Watch, and The Book Review.
References
Ansari, M. A. (1974). Social Life of the Mughal Emperors, 1526-1707. Allāhabad: Shanti Prakashan, pp 181-85.
Berman, B. J., Bhargava, R., & Laliberté, A. (Eds.). (2013). Secular states and religious diversity. UBC Press.
Rashid, S. K. (2005), Islāmic Financial Instruments for the Development of Waqf Properties. New Delhi, Institute of Objective Studies.
Government of India. (2006). Social, Economic and Educational status of Muslim Community of India, Report. New Delhi: Cabinet Secretariat, 219.