The Supreme Court of India has nullified a directive from the Kerala High Court that placed the Kerala Waqf Board under the supervision of a state joint secretary handling waqf affairs. The decision came on Tuesday as the apex court addressed an appeal by the Kerala Waqf Board, which contested the High Court’s order in the case The Kerala State Waqf Board and others v. Shone George and others.
The Bench, led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi, stated, “The further direction issued by the High Court to the effect that, for the time being, the Board shall function under the supervision of the Joint Secretary to the State government dealing with waqf matters, is deleted. However, the Joint Secretary may continue to function as a member of the Board, though not in that supervisory capacity.”
The controversy stems from a July 15 directive by the Kerala High Court. It had restrained the Waqf Board from executing major decisions, incurring capital expenditures, or making policy decisions, placing its operations under the joint secretary’s supervision. This interim order was issued while the court examined Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petitions challenging the Board’s current composition.
The petitioners, including Shone George, the State Vice President of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the Assembly of Christian Trust Services (ACTS), and former Junior Warrant Officer Stalin VM, argued that the Board’s formation was unconstitutional. They pointed out that the Kerala Waqf Board failed to appoint two non-Muslim members as mandated by the 2025 Waqf Amendment Act.
The High Court had initially observed that the Board’s current makeup seemed to contravene Section 14 of the 2025 Waqf Amendment Act, which requires at least two non-Muslim members on each State Waqf Board. As a result, the High Court ordered a halt to significant Board decisions and placed it under the state’s joint secretary’s supervision until a final decision on the PIL petitions.
During the Supreme Court hearing, Justice Bagchi questioned the rationale for curbing the Board’s activities solely due to the non-appointment of non-Muslim members, as required by the amended Waqf Act. He asked, “Why should the board be halted just because of this aspect only?” Senior Advocate Huzefa Ahmadi, representing the Waqf Board, noted that the Board members were not even served with the petition copy before the High Court’s extraordinary order was passed.
Senior Advocate Jaideep Gupta, representing the State, informed the Bench that the High Court would hear the case the following day. The Supreme Court subsequently disposed of the Waqf Board’s appeal, directing the High Court to expedite the matter. It also removed the portion of the High Court’s interim order that subjected the Waqf Board to state supervision. “There is no necessity to retain the last part of paragraph 6 of the impugned order (directing supervision of joint secretary),” the Supreme Court concluded.
The Court further requested the High Court to resolve the matter quickly, ensuring all parties have a fair chance to present their claims and counterclaims. The appeal was disposed of under these terms.
More Read
This ruling marks a significant step in the ongoing litigation surrounding the Waqf Board’s functioning and highlights the judiciary’s role in interpreting legislative amendments concerning religious and state governance.
