What is a Waqf, and what was earlier

A waqf is a charitable or religious endowment under Muslim law — real property or movable things are endowed for purposes like religious, educational, charitable use, etc. The Waqf Act, 1995, along with subsequent amendments, had been the legal framework governing how waqf properties are created, registered, managed, and how disputes are resolved. But over time there had been many complaints: waqf lands being encroached, rights being unclear, lack of uniformity in registration, delays and disputes, misuse, etc

Key changes introduced in the 2025 Amendment

• The Amendment introduces several sweeping changes. I’ll explain them more narratively rather than as bullet-points, to show how they interact:
• One of the central changes is the redefinition of who can create a waqf and under what conditions. Under the new law, someone creating a waqf must not only be a practicing Muslim but must have been practising Islam for at least five years.
• This is a significant change because previously such a “practice” criterion did not exist in the same way — it introduces a new temporal requirement tied to religious identity
• Another major change is to do with “waqf by user.” Under previous laws, there was a doctrine called “waqf by user,” which means that if someone uses property for waqf function-purposes over time, it might be considered a waqf even without a formal declaration or deed.
• The 2025 law removes this doctrine for the future: beyond the effective date of the new law, waqf by user is effectively derecognized except to the extent already registered. This change is intended to reduce ambiguities and prevent claims over property based merely on long usage without formal documentation.
• But it also means some long-standing informal waqf arrangements may lose legal recognition if they weren’t registered by the cut-off
• The Amendment also gives more power to government or state bodies in determining what is “government property” and whether a given property is waqf or not. For example, the law allows a “designated officer” (often someone in revenue administration) to inquire into whether a given property is government property, and if found so, to correct revenue records accordingly.
• Properties found to be government property will no longer be treated as waqf. This is to streamline identification and avoid prolonged court litigation, but also raises concerns about potential overreach or administrative arbitrariness
• Registration has been made mandatory for all waqf properties, whether created before or after the commencement of the Amendment. And a requirement is introduced that no waqf can be created (post-Amendment) without executing a proper waqf deed and registering it.
• The process of registering includes verification of title, and if a property is in dispute or is government property, certain procedures must be followed. If a waqf is not registered under the new law, the legal remedies for enforcing rights get severely restricted
• Changes are also made in how the Waqf Boards (state level) and the Central Waqf Council are composed. The Amendment allows for non-Muslim members to be part of these bodies.
• It also changes how certain officers like the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) or equivalent are appointed (e.g. from among state government officials of certain rank) rather than purely internal community selection in some cases. This increases government oversight
• Finally, the law tweaks limitation periods (i.e. time limits) for waqf boards to reclaim encroached properties or enforce rights, using rules that apply under the general Limitation Act rather than special waqf-only provisions. This can mean that in cases where waqf boards have delayed, they may lose legal power to act after certain time frames

Why these changes were said to be needed

• The government’s stated rationale is that many waqf properties have been lost, encroached upon, or misused because of lack of proper documentation, weak oversight, disputes and delays.
• The idea behind these changes is to ensure transparency: require registration, clarify ownership (especially vis-à-vis government vs private claims), reduce litigation, avoid fraudulent or arbitrary waqf claims, and have well-defined procedural norms
• There is also an aim to modernize the administration: defining officers, using revenue records, etc, so that waqf boards function more as formal bodies with clear accountability, rather than ad hoc or tradition-based management. 

What the controversies are

These reforms have generated significant criticism and legal challenges. Some of the main concerns:

• Religious and constitutional rights / discrimination: Critics argue that requiring a 5-year practice of Islam to create a waqf discriminates within the Muslim community, or between Muslims and non-Muslims (e.g. in donation situations), and violates equality (Article 14) and/or religious freedom (Articles 25, 26) under the Indian Constitution

• Autonomy of Muslim institutions: Many fear that by giving more control to administrative officers, government nominees, non-Muslim members on bodies, etc., the traditional autonomy of waqf boards and trustees (mutawallis) will be undermined. The worry is not just misuse, but loss of community control and risk of political or bureaucratic interference.
• Impact on informal waqf arrangements: There are many waqf properties or arrangements that exist based on long usage, or oral declarations, or less formal deeds — especially in rural areas. With abolishing “waqf by user” going forward and adding strict registration requirements, many existing waqfs could lose legal recognition, which could adversely affect people depending on them
• Effect on claims over government land / properties: Because the law allows determination of government property (and convergence of revenue records) by designated officers, there is concern that waqf boards might lose properties which they have long claimed, especially where records are weak or historical
• Urgency and time limits: The law gives limited time (e.g. six months) for certain suits or legal proceedings to be instituted, or for waqfs to register, beyond which rights might be lost unless “sufficient cause” is shown. This raises the issue whether people who did not know or could not meet the deadlines will be unfairly disadvantaged
• Non-Muslim involvement: Some see the requirement to include non-Muslims in waqf boards or councils as diluting the religious nature of waqf management. Others argue it's fine from the viewpoint of transparency and inclusive governance. This is a core point of disagreement
• Which provisions have already been stayed by courts: Because of these challenges, the Supreme Court in some cases has stayed (i.e. temporarily halted) certain controversial provisions. For example: the 5-year Islam practice requirement has been stayed, some limits on non-Muslim members, etc. This means not all parts of the Act are being enforced at present

1.With reference to the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, consider the following statements:

1. The doctrine of waqf by user has been abolished for any future claims after the commencement of the Act.

2. A person must have practiced Islam for at least five years before being eligible to create a waqf.

3. The Act provides for mandatory registration of all waqf properties, including those created before its commencement.

4. Only Muslims can be members of State Waqf Boards after the 2025 amendment.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a) 1, 2 and 3 only
(b) 1 and 3 only
(c) 2 and 4 only
(d) 1, 2, 3 and 4