Not limited to Muslims only … Government gave answers in SC on Waqf law

New Delhi. The central government told the Supreme Court on Friday that many Waqf properties are not limited to Muslims only, as they also include the rights and claims of other communities. He also said that controlling these properties can be the aspect of the public system, as such disputes can have widespread effects. The Central Government while requesting the Supreme Court said that this law cannot be completely banned, because ‘the notion of constitutional’ is in its favor.

In the Supreme Court, the government defended the controversial law in the initial counter -affidavit of 1332 pages, saying that it is ‘shocking thing’ that after 2013, the Waqf land increased by 20,92,072.536 hectares (more than 20 lakh hectares). The affidavit states that ‘a total of 18,29,163.896 acres of land was witnessed in India before the Mughal period, pre -independence and post -independence. The affidavit accused of ‘misuse’ of earlier provisions to encroach private and government properties.

What did the government say…
This came when the Central Government has filed its reply in the Supreme Court regarding hearing of the amended Waqf Act, which was opposed to the ban on any provision of the Act which includes ‘Waqf-Bai-Uzer’. The central government said that amendment to the Waqf Act maintains religious practices and brings judicial accountability. He further said that amendments maintain the constitution and leave the matter of faith and worship untouched.

Who gave the answer in the Supreme Court…
This affidavit was filed by Joint Secretary Shersha C Sheikh Mohidin in the Ministry of Minority Affairs. The affidavit states that there is an established situation in the law that the constitutional courts will not directly or indirectly stop any statutory provision. The perception of constitutionality applies to the laws made by Parliament. The perception of constitutionality is a legal principle, according to which if a law is challenged in the court, the court generally assumes that it is constitutional and only it is held unconstitutional when it clearly violates the Constitution.

False arguments given in petitions
The central government said that the court should review these aspects during the hearing of the petitions, but it would be unfair to stop (or partial restriction) without knowing about the adverse results of the order. The affidavit states that petitions challenging the Act have been filed on the basis of the false argument that amendment in the law takes away the fundamental right of religious freedom.

When can the Supreme Court review the law
The Central Government said that the Supreme Court can review the law only when the fundamental rights contained in Legislative Jurisdiction and Article 32 have been violated. The government said that these amendments have been made after conducting very wide, intensive and analytical studies of the Parliamentary Committee with members of major political parties. The affidavit states that the Parliament, while working under its jurisdiction, has ensured that religious institutions like Waqf are managed in such a way that the faith of those who believe in them and the society should be maintained and there is no violation of religious autonomy.

The central government said that this law is valid and has been made by using legislative power in a legitimate manner. The affidavit states that it is unacceptable to change the legislative system made by the legislature. On April 17, the central government assured the apex court that it would not indulge in the Waqf properties, including the “Waqf by user” property by May 5, nor would he make any appointment in the Central Waqf Council and the Board, a bench headed by Chief Justice Sanjeev Khanna will hear the case of passing the interim order.