Author(s): Archita Singh Paliwal
Paper Details: Volume 4, Issue 4
Citation: IJLSSS 4(4) 02
Page No: 12 – 20
ABSTRACT
The Umeed Act, 2025—officially recognized as the Unified Management, Empowerment, Efficiency, and Development Act—marks a watershed moment in the regulation and governance of Waqf properties in India. Passed to amend the earlier Waqf Act of 1995, the Umeed Act deals fundamentally with modernizing management structures, improving transparency, shifting the legal landscape to support individual and communal rights, and ushering in technology-led transformation. The Act eliminates practices that facilitated arbitrary claims and misuse, such as “waqf by user,” and enhances safeguards for women, children, orphans, and tribal groups. This article comprehensively analyzes the impetus, goals, core provisions, controversies, and significance of the Umeed Act while reflecting on its impact within the broader canvas of Indian constitutionalism and minority protection.
KEYWORDS: Umeed Act 2025, Waqf property, waqf reforms, waqf administration, transparency, inheritance rights, religious endowments, trusts, property law, digitization, minority rights, legal reforms, Limitation Act, non-Muslim board members, Section 40
INTRODUCTION
Waqf—an Islamic legal institution involving dedication of property for religious or charitable purposes—has played a pivotal role in the socio-economic and cultural landscape of India. The management of waqf properties, which now span nearly 9.4 lakh acres and are valued at approximately ₹1.2 lakh crore, has historically faced issues of mismanagement, misuse, opaque procedures, and legal disputes.
The original Waqf Act of 1995, while expanding the Waqf Board’s powers and laying the foundational framework, was beset by loopholes, arbitrary exercise of authority, and lack of accountability mechanisms. Most notably, provisions like Section 40 (conferring wide declaratory powers to Waqf Boards) and the option of “waqf by user” allowed properties to be appropriated or declared as Waqf without rigorous checks, fuelling legal challenges and public distress.[1]
In response, the Government of India, after extensive consultations and a thorough review by a Joint Parliamentary Committee, enacted the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, now affectionately known as the Umeed Act—a deliberate step toward “Unified Management, Empowerment, Efficiency, and Development.”[2]
WHAT IS A WAQF PROPERTY?
A Waqf is a property donated by Muslims for a specific religious, charitable, or private purpose. Ownership of the property is considered to belong to God, while its benefits are directed to the specified purposes.
- Establishment: A Waqf can be established through a written deed, legal instrument, or orally.
- Use and Permanence: A property may be recognised as Waqf if it has been used for religious or charitable purposes over an extended period. [3]
- Irrevocability: Once a property is designated as waqf, it cannot be reclaimed or altered by the donor.[4]
- However, not all Islamic countries have Waqf properties. Countries like Turkey, Libya, Egypt, Sudan, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Tunisia, and Iraq lack Waqfs.
- In contrast, India has Waqf Boards as the largest urban landowners, with legal protection under an Act.
- Waqf Boards in India oversee approximately 8.7 lakh properties covering around 9.4 lakh acres of land, with an estimated worth of ₹1.2 lakh crore.
- Further, Waqf Board is the largest landowner in India after the Armed Forces and the Indian Railways.
HISTORICAL CONTEXT: WAQF IN INDIA
THE LEGACY OF WAQF LAW
The institution of waqf has a long legal and social legacy in India, with statutes dating back to the Waqf Act of 1923, subsequently replaced by the Waqf Act, 1954 and then substantially revised by the Waqf Act, 1995. These statutes were designed to formalise the administration of waqf properties, provide for central and state boards, and ensure that properties dedicated for religious and charitable uses remain protected and directed toward their intended beneficiaries.
Despite reforms, the waqf sector has been fraught with challenges. The core of criticism has focused on:
- Misuse or encroachment of waqf land (with estimates exceeding 58,000 illegally occupied waqf properties).
- Lack of technological integration and accurate records.
- Ambiguities in provisions such as ‘waqf by user’, sometimes enabling arbitrary claims over long-used religious land.
- Weak grievance redressal, limited stakeholder participation, and gender inequities.
RATIONALE BEHIND THE UMEED ACT, 2025
Passed after extensive debates in both houses of Parliament, the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025—popularly called the Umeed Act—represents a determined attempt to address administrative inefficiencies and institutional gaps in the waqf sector. Key drivers for reform included:
- The need for legal clarity over ‘waqf by user’ and arbitrary claims.
- Demands for gender justice and protection of inheritance rights for women.
- Pressure to streamline dispute resolution and prevent indefinite litigation.
- The push for modern, tech-enabled management of community assets.
- Calls to balance community autonomy with broader societal and constitutional values of secularism, inclusivity, and social welfare.
CORE PROVISIONS OF THE UMEED ACT, 2025
RENAMING AND THEMATIC RE-ORIENTATION
The Act is now officially called the “Umeed Act,” underscoring its focus on empowerment and efficient, accountable waqf governance.[5]
INCLUSIVITY AND REPRESENTATION
Non-Muslim Members: For the first time, central and state Waqf Boards must include non-Muslim representatives (at least two), broadening perspectives and bolstering accountability.[6]
Women’s Representation: Each Board must include at least two women and ensure representation from all major Muslim sects—Sunni, Shia, Bohra, and OBC Muslims.
ABOLITION OF “WAQF BY USER” AND SECTION 40
Waqf by User Eliminated: Properties cannot be declared waqf merely due to long-term religious or charitable use unless formally documented and declared by a qualified individual.
Section 40 Abolished: The Waqf Board’s unilateral power to declare any property as waqf is rescinded. Only legitimate title holders can dedicate property as waqf, and all claims must undergo legal scrutiny.
CLARIFICATION OF WAQF, TRUSTS, AND INHERITANCE[7]
Separation between Trusts and Waqfs: Trusts created by Muslims, and governed by separate public charity statutes, are excluded from “waqf” purview, eliminating overlap and legal ambiguity.
Eligibility for Dedication: Only Muslims who have practiced Islam for at least five years can dedicate waqf. Oral and undocumented waqf creations are now invalid.
Inheritance Protections: Property cannot become waqf unless legal inheritance of all heirs (especially women, widows, divorced women, orphans) are ensured and executed in advance.
DIGITIZATION AND TECHNOLOGY-DRIVEN MANAGEMENT[8]
Digital Registration Portal: All waqfs—old and new—must be registered on a central government-managed portal within six months of the Act’s commencement (extendable for good reason).
Land Title Verification: Now rests with district collectors or higher officers, ensuring independent validation. Tribal lands, government lands, and protected monuments are expressly barred from being declared waqf.
LEGAL REFORMS: LIMITATION, DISPUTE RESOLUTION, APPEALS
Limitation Act, 1963: Applied to waqf recovery claims and disputes, introducing a 12-year window for initiation—ending perpetual uncertainty for property holders.
Tribunals: Retained, but now must include a district judge, a senior government official, and an Islamic law expert—offering judicial as well as administrative expertise. Their decisions are appealable to High Courts within 90 days, preserving judicial oversight.
Legal Oversight: Decisions on whether land is waqf or government property rest with an officer above Collector rank, subject to further review.
FINANCIAL REFORMS AND ACCOUNTABILITY
Mandatory Audits and CAG Oversight: Properties or entities earning more than ₹1 lakh per annum must be audited, adding rigor and transparency. CAG (Comptroller and Auditor General) audits are mandated for the largest boards and funds.
Reduced Board Contributions: Mandatory contribution to the Waqf Board cut from 7% to 5% of annual income, enabling more operational freedom for local waqf units.
District-Level Oversight: New committees to monitor governance at the local level, increasing participation, and responsiveness.
IMPLICATIONS & IMPACT
ON WAQF PROPERTIES AND MUSLIM COMMUNITY
Transparency and Governance: The digital portal and audit mandates are expected to drastically reduce fraud, “benami” holdings, and unauthorized transfers, ensuring benefits reach the intended charitable and religious projects.
Women and Vulnerable Groups: Statutory protection of inheritance rights, allied with gender and sectarian representation at the Board level, addresses historical disparities, offering a template for gender-sensitive religious property laws.
Legal Clarity: Abolition of “waqf by user” and clear cut-off dates for dispute claims will likely stem the tide of endless litigation and minimize “land grab” allegations.[9]
ON NON-MUSLIM, PRIVATE, AND TRIBAL LANDOWNERS
Safeguards for Private and Tribal Owners: Exclusion of Schedule V and VI tribal lands, and recognition of private ownership unless voluntarily dedicated as waqf, resolves long-standing conflicts and protects vulnerable communities from dispossession.
Retrospective Risks: However, clauses making government revenue records decisive for waqf status, and tightening evidence standards, could facilitate the recovery of government and tribal land, but potentially override historic waqf claims stemming from administrative lapses.
ON BROADER SOCIETAL, POLITICAL, AND CONSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT
Secular Safeguards: By mandating diversity of representation and eliminating unilateral waqf board powers, the Act attempts to balance religious autonomy with principles of constitutional secularism and equality.
Technology as Accountability: With all waqf properties digitized and scrutinized under uniform technology protocols, India joins other global jurisdictions in using e-governance to address age-old property management issues.
JUDICIAL APPROACH
Recent legislative reforms, especially the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, have significantly impacted judicial approaches and administrative processes surrounding Waqf property.
Key landmark cases include:
- H.P. Waqf Board vs. Sudarshan Kumar and Others (2023)[10]: The Himachal Pradesh Wakf Board sought to restrain alleged unauthorized construction on Waqf property. Both the trial and appellate courts emphasized the need for clear, conclusive evidence to sustain claims over Waqf land, underscoring the necessity of robust documentation, which the 2025 Act now mandates through digital records and GIS mapping.
- Maharashtra State Board Of Waqf vs. Shaikh Yusuf Bhai Chawla [11](2022 & 2012): The Supreme Court reinforced that Waqf Tribunals have exclusive jurisdiction to determine if a property is Waqf, and the distinction between Muslim public trusts and Waqf must be clearly established based on both facts and law. The 2025 Act supports this by clarifying procedures for property status determination and reinforcing the exclusive jurisdiction of Waqf Tribunals.
- Anis Fatma Begum vs. Debasish Ghosh & Ors (2024)[12]: The Calcutta High Court affirmed that eviction matters concerning Waqf properties fall within the Waqf Tribunal’s jurisdiction, even where state tenancy laws are cited in defense. The Act enhances clarity in resolving such jurisdictional challenges.
- Faseela M. Vs. Munnerul Islam Madrasa Committee (2014) & Ramesh Gobindram vs. Sugra Humayun Mirza Waqf (2010)[13]: These Supreme Court judgments clarified the scope of Waqf Tribunal vs. Civil court jurisdiction. Where the Tribunals are mandated by the Act to address certain disputes, civil courts’ jurisdiction is excluded; otherwise, civil courts retain jurisdiction.
- Salem Muslim Burial Ground Protection Committee vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2023)[14]: The Supreme Court insisted that procedural requirements under the Waqf Act—especially conducting surveys before declaring a property as Waqf—are mandatory for legal validity.
CRITICISMS AND DEBATES
The Umeed Act was not passed without controversy or dissent. Critics—especially sections of the minority Muslim community—fear that:
- Retrospective Dispossessions: The possibility that historic waqf property may revert to the state, especially where “government” is entered in old revenue records, can cause dispossession and contestation, sometimes contrary to precedent court orders.
- Dilution of “Religious Rights”: Detractors argue that the inclusion of non-Muslims on boards and abrogation of user doctrine weakens the religious character of institutional waqf management.
- Digitization Pitfalls: Rural waqfs lacking documentation or access to online systems might be inadvertently excluded from legal protection, exacerbating loss for genuine claimants.
However, proponents argue that these steps:
- Prevent Abuse: Curb fraudulent waqf claims, and arbitrary board actions, and promote the greater good.
- Empower All: Not just Muslims, but anyone with a stake in community welfare, by ensuring engagement, scrutiny, and benefit sharing at every administrative level.
CONCLUSION
The Umeed Act, 2025, stands as a landmark in India’s journey toward modern, transparent, and accountable religious endowment management. Reflecting a deep engagement with constitutional principles, public opinion, and the demands of technological change, the Act offers a model to reconcile minority rights with broader social interests while tackling the challenge of rights of all heirs
trust, transparency, and property justice head-on.
The reforms promise much—efficient governance, gender inclusion, protection of vulnerable lands, and a significant reduction in legal disputes. India’s experience with the Umeed Act may provide vital lessons for other plural societies grappling with the stewardship of religious and charitable assets in the 21st century.
REFERENCES
https://www.pmfias.com/waqf-amendment-act-2025
https://padhai.ai/blogs-padhai/waqf-(amendment)-act-2025-a-comprehensive-analysis
H.P. Wakf Board vs Sudarshan Kumar And Others on 31 October, 2023 available at https://indiankanoon.org/doc/112752122/
Maharashtra State Board Of waqfs vs Shaikh Yusuf Bhai Chawla on 20 October, 2022 available at https://indiankanoon.org/doc/90709522/
Anis Fatma Begum vs Debasish Ghosh & Ors on 21 May, 2024 available at https://indiankanoon.org/doc/172254355/
Faseela M. Vs. Munnerul Islam Madrasa Committee (2014) & Ramesh Gobindram vs. Sugra Humayun Mirza Wakf (2010) AIR SCW 2503 available at https://indiankanoon.org/doc/17092811/
Salem Muslim Burial Ground Protection Committee vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2023) available at https://indiankanoon.org/doc/137942978/
[1] The Waqf Act, 1995
[2] Joint Parliamentary Committee report on the Waqf (Amendment), Parliament of India (JPC Report, 2024–25)
[3] Waqf Act, 1995, ss. 2, 40
[4] Waqf Act, 1995, ss. 11–12
[5] Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, Preamble; Gazette notification, s. 1(1) (short title and commencement)
[6] Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, ss. 6–8
[7] Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, ss. 3–5
[8] Ibid ss. 20-22
[9] Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, ss. 15–16, 25–28
[10] RSA No. 519/2005
[11] (2022) 6 SCC 345
[12] 2024 Supreme (Cal) 1353
[13] Faseela M. Vs. Munnerul Islam Madrasa Committee (2014) AIR 2014 SC 2064 and Ramesh Gobindram vs. Sugra Humayun Mirza Wakf (2010) (2010) 8 SCC 726
[14] (2023) 16 SCC 264