High Court Intervenes in Waqf Board Operations
In a significant legal development, the Kerala High Court has issued an interim order restraining the Kerala State Waqf Board from making substantial decisions, undertaking capital expenditures, or enacting policy changes. This decision will remain in effect until the court resolves petitions challenging the board’s current composition. The court’s order comes amidst concerns that the board’s structure may not comply with the requirements of the 2025 Waqf Amendment Act.
Judicial Scrutiny Over Board’s Composition
The Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar VM, delivered this interim ruling. The bench noted that the existing composition of the Waqf Board appears to violate Section 14 of the 2025 Waqf Amendment Act, which mandates the inclusion of at least two non-Muslim members in each State Waqf Board.
Restrictions Imposed by the Court
As per the court’s directive, the Waqf Board’s decision-making capabilities are now subject to judicial oversight. The board is prohibited from making major decisions or capital expenditures without obtaining explicit permission from the court. To ensure compliance, the board will function under the supervision of the Joint Secretary responsible for Waqf matters within the state government.
State Concedes Inconsistencies
Kerala’s Advocate General, Jaju Babu, acknowledged before the court that the board’s constitution contains certain discrepancies. The State Government’s affidavit, submitted on July 14, underscores the need to reconstitute the board in accordance with Section 14 of the Waqf Act.
Legal Petitions and Allegations
The court is slated to revisit this matter in two weeks. The petitions under review include those filed by the State Vice President of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), Shone George, a Christian entity named the Assembly of Christian Trust Services (ACTS), and Stalin VM, a retired Junior Warrant Officer of the Indian Army and former under secretary in the Kerala government. The complainants argue that the Waqf Board’s failure to appoint the requisite non-Muslim members renders its operations unconstitutional and invalidates its administrative and quasi-judicial decisions.
More Read
Legislative Context
The 2025 Waqf Amendment Act, effective since April 8 of the previous year, stipulates the inclusion of at least two non-Muslim members in Waqf Boards, excluding ex officio members. Although the Supreme Court reviewed this amendment, it did not suspend its enforcement, instead capping the number of non-Muslim members at three.
Specific Allegations
George’s Public Interest Litigation (PIL) accuses the Kerala government of intentionally disregarding the statutory mandate by appointing a board composed solely of Muslim members. ACTS’s petition challenges the board’s decision to upload contentious land details from Munambam to the UMEED Portal, a centralized platform for Waqf property information. Stalin’s petition further questions the validity of former CPI(M) MLA Kunhammed Kutty Master’s continued tenure on the board after his legislative term ended in the 2026 Assembly elections.
Legal Representation
Representing George are Senior Advocate Santhosh Mathew and a team of lawyers including Shinto Mathew Abraham, Anil Sebastian Pulickel, and others. ACTS is represented by advocate Joseph Joy, while Advocate Lakshmi Sreedhar represents Stalin. Additional Solicitor General P Sreekumar represents the Union of India in these proceedings.
