What is Waqf and what assets does it comprise?
Waqf refers to assets dedicated solely for religious or charitable purposes under Islamic law. Once a property is designated as waqf, its ownership transfers from the person who created the waqf (waqif) to Allah, making the dedication permanent and irreversible. These assets are managed by a mutawalli, either appointed by the waqif or by an appropriate authority. In India, the Waqf Board is reportedly the third-largest landholder after the Railways and the Defence Department, controlling around 8.7 lakh properties across 9.4 lakh acres. These properties are valued at an estimated Rs 1.2 lakh crore. There are 32 waqf boards, including two Shia waqf boards in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. Approximately 200 individuals manage the control of these state Waqf boards.
What are the challenges posed by the irrevocability of Waqf?
Once a property is declared as waqf, it remains permanently so, which has led to numerous disputes and claims. For example, claims over two islands in Bet Dwarka have caused confusion in courts. Other notable disputes include the Bengaluru Eidgah ground, claimed as waqf property from the 1850s, and the Surat Municipal Corporation building, which is disputed due to its historical use as a 'sarai' during the Mughal period. Additionally, properties like Kolkata's Tollygunge Club, Royal Calcutta Golf Club, and ITC Windsor Hotel in Bengaluru are all situated on waqf land. Encroachments on waqf properties are another concern, exemplified by the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board's claim in 2022, asserting ownership over Thiruchendurai village, which is predominantly inhabited by Hindus.
Historical Background of Waqf:
Amongst the many branches of Islamic jurisprudence, the law on Waqf is considered to be a significant branch. However, it is pertinent to note that the term ‘Waqf’ is mentioned nowhere in the Holy Book, the seeds of this concept are very connotative in some of the verses. The more foundational emergence of waqf can be found in the words and deeds of the Prophet Mohammed. There is a well authenticated tradition that when Omer sought the advice of the Prophet for the pious use of a piece of land called Sammagh in Khaibar, the Prophet of God said:
“Tie up the property and devote the usufruct to human beings and it is not to be sold or made subject of gift or inheritance; devote its produce to your children, your kindred and the poor in the way of God.”
The Prophet himself dedicated a piece of land he had acquired in the canton of Khaibar for the use of travellers. Similarly, Abu Baker created a waqf in favour of his children.
Waqf under Muslim Rule:
With the advent of Muslim rule in India, the concept of wakf got introduced into this country. During whole of the Mughal and Sultanate period, waqf management seemed to be very theocratically centralized in nature. Prominently, waqfs in India date back to the beginning of the Delhi Sultanate, when Sultan Muizuddin Sam Ghaor dedicated two villages in favour of the Jama Masjid of Multan and handed its administration to Shaikhul Islam. As the Delhi Sultanate and later Islamic dynasties flourished in India, the number of Waqf properties kept increasing in India. During the Muslim era, particularly under Firoz Shah Tughlaq’s rule (1351 to 1388), efforts were made to organize Waqf initiatives by the populace. It was during Firoz Shah Tughlaq’s reign that the practice of creating Waqfnamas (endowment deeds) flourished in India.
During the Islamic Golden Age, waqf institutions played a critical role in the development of Islamic scholarship and education. Another significant aspect of waqf in pre-British India was the close link of this institution with conversion and religious as well as cultural appropriation. Thomas Arnold in his book ‘The preaching of Islam: A history of the propagation of the Muslim faith’, also portrays ‘Sufis’ as Islamic ‘missionaries’ among non-Muslims. Another historian Muzaffar Alam in his book titled as ‘The Languages of Political Islam: India 1200-1800’ also mentions that some Sufis and their general sense of moderation persuaded many Hindus to convert to Islam. Richard Eaton in his work regarding, ‘Approaches to the Study of Conversion to Islam in India’ called this process as ‘accretion and reform’, whereby the Sufi saints would appropriate Hindu/local customs and nominally convert the population to Islam.
Religious Endowments under British Rule:
During British rule in India, the administration of religious endowments, including waqf, underwent significant changes. The British were initially reluctant to interfere with religious institutions but eventually introduced various laws to regulate religious endowments. These legislations were applied to both Hindu and Muslim endowments, reflecting the British government's attempts to maintain control over these religious and charitable trusts. Below is a summary of the key legislative acts related to religious endowments under British rule.
Regulation XIX of 1810 (Bengal Code)
The first formal attempt to regulate religious endowments came with Regulation XIX of 1810, passed in the Bengal Presidency. This regulation aimed to manage the revenues generated from lands granted for religious purposes, such as mosques, temples, and public utilities. It allowed the British government to oversee the proper use of these revenues and ensure they were directed towards their intended charitable and religious objectives. However, this regulation applied equally to both Hindu and Muslim endowments, without establishing separate provisions for either religion.
Regulation VII of 1817 (Madras Code)
Following the Bengal Code, the Madras Presidency introduced a similar regulation—Regulation VII of 1817. This regulation covered the management of religious endowments, ensuring that revenues from these properties were properly appropriated for public purposes, such as the maintenance of mosques, temples, bridges, and other public utilities. Like its Bengal counterpart, the Madras Code imposed government supervision on religious endowments to prevent mismanagement.
Religious Endowments Act, 1863
In 1863, the Religious Endowments Act was passed to further regulate the management of religious properties. This Act removed direct government involvement in managing religious and charitable endowments, particularly for Hindu and Muslim institutions. It relieved government bodies, like the Board of Revenue, from the responsibility of supervising these endowments. Instead, management was entrusted to local committees and managers, with provisions for civil courts to intervene if necessary. This Act marked a shift towards decentralizing the control of religious endowments while still allowing for judicial oversight.
Charitable Endowments Act, 1890
The Charitable Endowments Act, passed in 1890, provided a legal framework for the vesting and administration of properties held in trust for charitable purposes. This Act introduced the role of "Treasurer of Charitable Endowments," who was appointed by the central and state governments to oversee these properties. It also detailed the duties and powers of the Treasurer to ensure that the income generated from charitable endowments was appropriately managed and directed toward public welfare.
Charitable and Religious Trusts Act, 1920
The Charitable and Religious Trusts Act of 1920 sought to address some of the limitations of the Religious Endowments Act of 1863. This Act allowed any person with an interest in a charitable or religious trust to apply to a district judge for information about the trust’s nature, value, and management. The law also enabled courts to examine and audit the accounts of these trusts, giving beneficiaries a legal route to ensure transparency and accountability in the management of endowments.
Waqf under British rule
During British rule in India, the landmark case of Abdul Fata Mahomed Ishak v. Russomoy Dhur (1894) significantly impacted the legal treatment of waqf, particularly family waqfs (waqf-alal-aulad). The Privy Council ruled that if the primary purpose of a waqf was family benefit and the charitable element was illusory or minimal, such a waqf was invalid. This judgment rejected the legality of private waqfs made solely for family enrichment, requiring a substantial dedication to religious or charitable purposes for the waqf to be valid.
The ruling also introduced a distinction between public waqf (for public religious or charitable causes) and private waqf (for family benefit), with the latter being subject to strict limitations under British law. The judgment was based on the rule against perpetuities, which prohibits the indefinite holding of property within a family, as outlined in the Transfer of Property Act (1882) and the Indian Succession Act (1925).
This decision faced backlash from the Muslim community, eventually leading to the Mussalman Wakf Validating Act of 1913, which restored the legality of family waqfs, provided some income was directed to charitable causes, effectively reversing the Abdul Fata ruling.
Mussalman Wakf Validating Act, 1913
The 1913 Act restored the legality of family waqfs by allowing waqf-alal-aulad, provided that a portion of the income was dedicated to religious or charitable causes. This legislation was a critical development in codifying Islamic endowment laws and addressing the grievances of the Muslim community in India. Mr. Mohammad Ali Jinnah advocated the Bill which later on became Act VI of 1913 to reproduce the Mussalman law regarding waqf-alal-aulad in a codified form and to restore the validity of such waqfs by providing them complete immunity. Mr. Jinnah was elected as a member of the Imperial Legislative Council to look after Muslim interests. He justified the trust reposed in him by advocating the Mussalman Wakf Validating Bill and getting it enacted in 1913. This Act made all waqfs (including the waqf-alal-aulad) as valid, even if the benefit to the poor or religious or charitable purpose was remote. Thus, the Act gave the right to Muslims to create waqf for maintenance and support of his family or of himself on the pretext of being charitable and religious.
Demand for a separate law to manage waqf properties:
After the enactment of Montagu–Chelmsford Reforms, 1919, which led to the enactment of the Government of India Act of 1919, the legislature of India could not change or reverse any law passed by the British Parliament in relation to India. This step played an important role to remove any kind of discrepancies that occurred between Privy Council’s decision and the enactment of Mussalman Wakf Validating Act, 1913. But, taking the benefit of prevailing dubious situation, polarization on the basis of community started increasing in Indian polity. The Congress, the Muslim League and the British started competitive ethnic bidding for the Muslims. The Muslim community was demanding a law for effective management and control of the waqf properties since several people were misusing the waqf property, some unscrupulous mutawallis were misappropriating properties for their own benefits as there was no check upon them and there was no mechanism to determine as to which property was a waqf property. Hence, to overcome such challenges, the Mussalman Wakf Act, 1923 was enacted.
Mussalman Wakf Act, 1923
The Mussalman Wakf Act of 1923 was a key piece of legislation focused on the regulation of waqf properties. It required mutawallis (waqf trustees) to keep proper accounts and mandated the publication of waqf property records. While it did not establish any independent body for waqf supervision, it empowered civil courts to oversee matters related to waqf management. The Act was significant in improving the transparency and accountability of waqf trustees and helped reduce mismanagement of waqf assets. Several provincial amendments followed to further refine its provisions in different parts of India.
Post-Independence Legislation in India
After India's independence in 1947, the management of waqf properties remained under the Mussalman Wakf Act of 1923. However, post-independence brought new challenges, particularly related to evacuee properties, leading to significant changes in the legal framework governing waqf administration. Several state-level enactments also applied alongside the 1923 Act, but the central government sought to create a unified approach to managing waqf properties.
The Wakf Act, 1954
The Congress government introduced the Wakf Act of 1954 to provide more comprehensive and centralized management of waqf properties. This Act established state Waqf Boards with wide-ranging powers to oversee waqf properties. These boards were endowed with authorities not granted to other religious or charitable endowment bodies, making the management of waqf unique Motivation Behind the Act
The necessity for a new act was partly due to the handling of evacuee properties left by Muslims who migrated to Pakistan during the Partition. Many believed the 1954 Act aimed to manage these properties better, which had been transferred to the Indian Waqf Boards. Section 108 of the 1995 Act (amended in 2013) still contains provisions related to evacuee waqf properties, confirming the intention to manage these assets.
Repeal of Previous Legislation
The Wakf Act of 1954 repealed several earlier laws, including the Religious Endowments Act of 1863, the Charitable Endowments Act of 1890, the Charitable and Religious Trusts Act of 1920, and the Mussalman Wakf Act of 1923. It also nullified pre-1954 state laws governing waqf administration. This marked a significant shift in the management of waqf properties in post-independence India, centralizing control under the new framework.
The Wakf Act of 1954 was amended in 1964 and 1969 to address operational issues and further define the responsibilities of the Waqf Boards. However, despite these changes, concerns remained about the Act's effectiveness in managing waqf properties, prompting additional reforms.
The Wakf (Amendment) Act, 1984
In response to ongoing issues with the 1954 Act, the government established the Wakf Inquiry Committee to review waqf administration. Based on the committee’s recommendations, the Wakf (Amendment) Act of 1984 was introduced to restructure and improve the management of waqf properties.
Key Provisions of the Wakf (Amendment) Act, 1984
• Reconstitution of Waqf Boards: The amendment reorganized the Waqf Boards, granting them additional powers over waqf properties.
• Waqf Tribunals: It established specialized tribunals to resolve disputes related to waqf properties ruling out the jurisdiction of Civil Courts.
• Committees and Commissioners: The Act introduced new committees and expanded the powers of waqf commissioners to enhance oversight and improve administrative functions.
Opposition from the Muslim Community
Despite its intentions to improve waqf management, the 1984 Amendment faced backlash from the Muslim community. The main issue was the increased authority given to the Waqf Commissioner, who was seen as having excessive control over the Waqf Boards, diminishing their autonomy. Many viewed this as undue state interference in religious endowments. Due to these concerns, the 1984 Act was never fully implemented. In response, the government engaged in further discussions, leading to the introduction of the Waqf Act of 1995, which attempted to balance the positive elements of the 1954 Act and the 1984 Amendment, while addressing community objections.
The Waqf Act, 1995
The Waqf Act of 1995 was introduced to consolidate and amend previous waqf legislation, repealing both the Wakf Act of 1954 and the Wakf (Amendment) Act of 1984. While it retained many provisions from the 1984 Amendment, it expanded the scope of waqf administration to provide more structure and efficiency in managing waqf properties.
Key Provisions
• Waqf Tribunals: The Act maintained the specialized waqf tribunals to handle disputes.
• Broad Powers for Waqf Boards: The Act gave Waqf Boards extensive control over managing waqf properties, providing them with the authority to oversee the administration of vast assets across India.
Continued Challenges
Despite these reforms, dissatisfaction remained within the Muslim community. Loopholes and inefficiencies in the administration of waqf properties were identified. In response, a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) was formed to review waqf management. Based on the JPC’s recommendations, the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2013 was introduced.
Recommendations from the Sachar Committee and Other Panels on the Waqf System
The Sachar Committee's report from 2006 highlighted several key recommendations for improving the Waqf system. It called for better regulation and efficient management of records, the inclusion of non-Muslim technical expertise in waqf management, and the integration of waqf under a financial audit scheme, among other suggestions.
Similarly, the Joint Parliamentary Committee report on waqf, presented to the Rajya Sabha in March 2008, made recommendations for overhauling the composition of waqf boards. It proposed appointing a senior officer as the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) for state waqf boards and emphasized the need for stringent actions against unauthorized alienation of waqf properties. The report also called for strict penalties for corrupt mutawwalis, the possibility for high courts to intervene in certain cases, the computerization of waqf boards, and ensuring adequate representation for the Shia community in the Central Waqf Council.
The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2013
The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2013 has made many changes to existing 1995 Act, more or less it made waqf invincible and gave expansive powers.
Major Amendments in the 1954, 1995, and 2013 Waqf Acts
1. Enlarged Definition of Waqf
In 1954, the definition of waqf expanded to include Waqf by User and Waqf-alal-aulad, allowing properties with long-term religious use to be designated as waqf. In 2013, it was further broadened to permit non-Muslims to dedicate properties as waqf, raising concerns about the inclusion of non-Muslim assets.
2. Introduction of Waqf by User
The 1954 Act introduced Waqf by User, allowing properties with historical religious use, like mosques and graveyards, to be presumed as waqf. The 1995 Act expanded this concept, permitting properties to remain classified as waqf even if religious use had ceased, potentially leading to misuse of land.
3. Judicial Proceedings: Waqf Tribunals
The 1954 Act left waqf disputes to civil courts, while the 1995 Act introduced Waqf Tribunals for quicker resolution. After the 2013 amendment, these tribunals gained even broader powers, such as handling evictions and property disputes.
4. State-Borne Cost of Survey
Initially, waqf property surveys were funded by waqf income under the 1954 Act. The 2013 Amendment shifted the financial burden to the state government, raising fairness concerns.
5. Muslim-Dominated Waqf Boards
The 1954 Act allowed a diverse membership for Waqf Boards, including non-Muslims and experts in various fields. However, post-2013 amendments made these boards predominantly Muslim, which raised concerns about fairness, particularly in disputes involving non-Muslims.
6. Expanded Powers of Waqf Boards
The Waqf Boards’ powers were significantly expanded in the 1995 Act, allowing them to classify properties under secular laws as waqf. This centralization of power, further strengthened in 2013, has been criticized for potential overreach.
7. Designation of Public Servants
The 1995 Act designated waqf officials, including mutawallis, as public servants, granting them privileges and immunities under the Indian Penal Code. This status was not given to similar figures in other religious communities.
8. "Any Person Aggrieved"
While the 1954 Act limited disputes to those with an interest in waqf, the 2013 Amendment expanded this to include "any person aggrieved", encompassing non-Muslims. However, it also limited the time frame for non-Muslims to challenge waqf claims to one year.
9. Appointment of Chief Executive Officer
The 1995 Act introduced the position of a Chief Executive Officer (CEO) for Waqf Boards, centralizing administrative control. The CEO, who must be Muslim, oversees waqf properties and manages day-to-day operations.
10. Alienation of Waqf Property
The 1954 Act did not regulate the sale or transfer of waqf properties, but the 1995 Act required Waqf Board approval for such actions. The 2013 Amendment further restricted this, making it nearly impossible to sell or transfer waqf properties.
11. Inclusion of Non-Muslim Properties
Amendments in 1964 and 1995 allowed properties donated by non-Muslims for religious purposes to be classified as waqf, raising concerns about the reach of waqf laws over non-Muslim assets.
12. Removal of Encroachments
The 1995 Act granted Waqf Boards the authority to remove encroachments from waqf properties, which was further strengthened in 2013 by broadening the definition of "encroacher" to include anyone occupying waqf property without legal authorization.
13. Evacuee Waqf Properties
The 1995 Act included provisions for managing evacuee waqf properties left by migrants during partition, expanding Waqf Board jurisdiction over these assets.
14. Overriding Effect
The 2013 Amendment gave the Waqf Act overriding authority, making it superior to conflicting laws and consolidating waqf management under its framework.
15. Bar on Limitation Act
The 1995 Act barred the application of the Limitation Act to waqf property claims, allowing Waqf Boards to file suits for reclaiming waqf properties without any time restrictions.
16. Restoration of Waqf Properties
The 2013 Act mandated the return of waqf properties occupied by government agencies within six months of a tribunal order, further empowering the Waqf Boards to reclaim waqf assets.
Waqf Systems in Other Countries
1. Turkey
Historically, waqfs in Turkey were essential for social welfare, education, and infrastructure during the Ottoman Empire. In 1923, waqf administration was centralized under the General Directorate of Foundations. This body now ensures that waqf revenues are used for public welfare, focusing on education and healthcare. Turkey’s waqf system is modernized and secularized, distinguishing it from many traditional systems globally.
2. Kuwait
Kuwait's waqf system is managed by the Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, which centralizes control over religious, educational, and social services supported by waqfs. The Ministry ensures that revenues are distributed for charitable purposes, making Kuwait’s waqf system highly centralized compared to the decentralized approach seen in countries like India.
3. Indonesia
Indonesia’s waqf is governed by Waqf Act No. 41 of 2004 and overseen by the Indonesia Waqf Board (BWI), established in 2007. The system focuses on using waqf for socio-economic development, with an emphasis on modernization through digitization and improved governance. The centralization of waqf administration allows for better management and transparency.
4. Lebanon
In Lebanon, the Directorate General of Islamic Waqf under the Ministry of Endowments and Islamic Affairs manages waqf properties. The Directorate focuses on transparency and efficiency, overseeing the use of waqf revenues for public welfare. Lebanon’s system is centralized and aims to modernize waqf management.
5. Syria
Waqf in Syria is administered by the Ministry of Awqaf, which manages properties inherited from the Ottoman and French periods. The Ministry ensures that waqf revenues are utilized for public welfare, with a centralized system that grants the Ministry significant control over waqf assets.
6. Singapore
Singapore’s waqf is governed by the Administration of Muslim Law Act (AMLA) and managed by Majlis Ugama Islam Singapura (MUIS). MUIS ensures that waqf properties are managed in alignment with Islamic principles. The centralized system in Singapore facilitates streamlined management and strict adherence to Islamic laws.
7. United Arab Emirates (UAE)
The UAE’s waqf system is governed by federal laws, with the General Authority of Islamic Affairs and Endowments overseeing waqf properties. The centralized approach focuses on modernizing waqf management and integrating it into the UAE’s national development plans.
8. Saudi Arabia
In Saudi Arabia, the General Authority for Awqaf (GAA), established in 2016, oversees the country’s waqf system. The GAA operates independently and is directly linked to the Prime Minister, with a focus on modernizing and centralizing waqf management, similar to the UAE.
9. Iraq
Iraq’s waqf system is divided between two separate offices: the Sunni Endowment Office and the Shiite Endowment Office, created after 2003. Each office manages its respective sect's religious endowments. Despite the sectarian division, Iraq’s waqf system is centralized within these separate entities.
10. Oman
In Oman, the Ministry of Endowments and Religious Affairs (MERA) manages waqf properties. The recent establishment of the Omani Waqf Establishment aims to professionalize waqf practices, with a focus on investing waqf assets for national development. Oman’s system is centralized and focused on modernization.
The administration of waqf varies across Muslim-majority countries, with different levels of state involvement. Some key differences are outlined below:
Centralization of Waqf Management:
Turkey - Highly centralized under the General Directorate of Foundations.
Kuwait - Managed by the Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs.
Indonesia - Governed by the Indonesia Waqf Board.
Saudi Arabia- Centralized under the General Authority for Awqaf.
Singapore - Administered by Majlis Ugama Islam Singapura (MUIS).
Legal Framework:
Turkey - Modern legal framework focusing on public welfare.
Kuwait - Unified under a central authority for efficiency.
Indonesia - Focuses on socio-economic development through waqf assets.
Saudi Arabia- Integrates waqf into national development.
Singapore - Highly centralized with a focus on modernization.
The Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024
The Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024, introduced in the Lok Sabha on August 8, 2024, makes significant changes to the Waqf Act of 1995, regulating waqf properties in India. The major amendments are summarized below:
1. Renaming of the Act
The Bill renames the Waqf Act, 1995 to the United Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act, 1995. This reflects a shift toward improving the overall efficiency and modernization of waqf management.
2. Formation of Waqf
The Bill restricts waqf formation to individuals practicing Islam for at least five years and clarifies that they must own the property being declared as waqf. It also removes the provision for Waqf by User and restricts Waqf-alal-aulad to ensure it does not infringe upon inheritance rights, especially of women.
3. Government Property and Waqf
Any government property previously identified as waqf will cease to be so. In cases of uncertainty over ownership, the Collector will submit a report to the state government, and if deemed government property, it will be updated in the revenue records.
4. Power to Determine Waqf Properties
The power of the Waqf Board to determine whether a property is waqf has been removed. This authority will now rest with the government, removing potential conflicts of interest.
5. Survey of Waqf Properties
Instead of the Survey Commissioner, the Bill empowers Collectors to survey waqf properties, with pending surveys conducted under state revenue laws. This change is aimed at streamlining the survey process under existing administrative structures.
6. Central Waqf Council
The Central Waqf Council will now include two non-Muslim members, broadening its representation. While the Muslim members must still include representatives from Muslim organizations and scholars of Islamic law, the requirement for all council members to be Muslim has been lifted. Additionally, at least two women members must still be included, but they must be Muslim.
7. Waqf Boards Composition
The state government will nominate members from the Muslim community to the Waqf Boards, but the inclusion of two non-Muslim members is now mandatory. The Board must also have representation from Shia, Sunni, Bohra, Agakhani, and Backward classes of Muslims. Additionally, two Muslim women must be part of the board.
8. Tribunals and Appeals
The composition of Waqf Tribunals has been revised. The Chairman must be a judge of the District or Sessions Court, and the other member should be a senior state officer. The Bill removes the requirement for a member knowledgeable in Muslim law. Additionally, decisions of the Tribunal can now be appealed in the High Court within 90 days.
9. Audit of Waqf Accounts
The central government can now authorize the CAG (Comptroller and Auditor General) to audit waqf accounts, replacing the previous system where the state government could audit the accounts at any time.
10. Separate Waqf Boards for Specific Communities
In addition to separate waqf boards for Sunni and Shia communities, the Bill allows for the establishment of separate boards for the Bohra and Aghakhani communities if they hold significant waqf properties in a state.
Why the Amendments Are Not Violative of Articles 25 and 26
The Waqf Act and its amendments do not fall within the purview of Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India, which pertain to the right to freely practice and propagate religion and the right of religious denominations to manage their own affairs, respectively. Here’s a breakdown of the reasoning:
1. Definition of Religious Denomination
Article 26 defines a religious denomination as a collection of individuals classified under the same name, having a common faith and organization, and designated by a distinctive name. This implies that a religious denomination consists of a cohesive group sharing a unified belief system and governance structure.
2. Supreme Court Judgment
In the landmark case of Bramchari v. State of W.B. (AIR 1995 SC 2089), the Supreme Court identified three essential elements to constitute a religious denomination:
o A collection of individuals sharing a system of beliefs or doctrines regarded as conducive to their spiritual well-being (a common faith).
o A common organization.
o Designation by a distinctive name.
3. Nature of the Waqf Board
The Waqf Board is a statutory body, not a congregation of individuals sharing a common faith. It functions more like a company, where multiple individuals come together to manage waqf properties and affairs. The Waqf Board does not represent a unified body of Muslims or any particular religious sect. Therefore, it does not qualify as a religious denomination as defined under Article 26.
4. Conclusion on Fundamental Rights
Since the Waqf Board does not fit the criteria for a religious denomination, any amendments or changes to the Waqf Act would not infringe upon the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 25 and 26. Thus, the amendments can be implemented without violating constitutional provisions related to religious freedom and management.
Inference
In summary, the amendments to the Waqf Act are not violative of Articles 25 and 26 because the Waqf Board is not a representative body of Muslims or a religious denomination. Consequently, changes made to the Act do not infringe upon any fundamental rights protected under these constitutional provisions.