Places of Worship Act and Waqf Amendment Bill

 Places of Worship Act and Waqf Amendment Bill

 

Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991

Commonly known as the "Worship Act" in India. 

This Act is often discussed in the context of religious properties and disputes, making it relevant to the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency, and Development (UMEED) Bill, which is the proposed renaming of the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024. 

Let us clarify the relationship between the two and explain the potential effects on Waqf properties and the Muslim community. 

The Places of Worship Act, 1991

The Places of Worship Act was enacted to maintain the religious character of places of worship as it existed on August 15, 1947 (India’s Independence Day). It prohibits the conversion of any place of worship from one religion to another and bars courts from entertaining disputes that seek to alter the status of religious sites as they stood on that date, except for the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid case, which was explicitly excluded due to ongoing litigation at the time. The Act aims to prevent communal conflicts over historical claims to religious sites. 

The UMEED Bill (Waqf Amendment Bill, 2024)

The UMEED Bill seeks to amend the Waqf Act, 1995, which governs Waqf properties—assets dedicated by Muslims for religious, pious, or charitable purposes under Islamic law. Key proposed changes include: 

• Inclusion of Non-Muslims: Mandating non-Muslim members in the Central Waqf Council and State Waqf Boards. 

• District Collector’s Role: Transferring the authority to determine whether a property is Waqf or government-owned from Waqf Boards to District Collectors. 

• Removal of "Waqf by User": Eliminating the provision that recognizes properties as Waqf based on long-term use without formal deeds. 

• Centralized Registration: Requiring Waqf properties to be registered via a central portal, with a six-month deadline for existing Waqfs to submit documentation. 

• Appeals to High Courts: Allowing appeals against Waqf Tribunal decisions in High Courts, removing their finality. 

• Stricter Creation Rules: Requiring a person to have practiced Islam for at least five years to create a Waqf and ensuring inheritance rights are not denied. 

Relationship Between the Two

The Places of Worship Act and the UMEED Bill intersect in their implications for religious properties, particularly Waqf properties like mosques, graveyards, and dargahs. The 1991 Act protects the status of such sites as they were in 1947, meaning any Waqf property recognized as a place of worship at that time should, in theory, retain its character. However, the UMEED Bill’s changes—especially the removal of "Waqf by user" and the empowerment of District Collectors—could create tension with this principle. For instance: 

• Many Waqf properties, such as historical mosques or graveyards, lack formal documentation and have been recognized as Waqf due to centuries of use. The UMEED Bill’s omission of "Waqf by user" could challenge their status if documentation is unavailable, potentially opening them to disputes or government claims. 

• The Places of Worship Act prohibits altering the religious character of these sites, but the UMEED Bill’s shift of authority to District Collectors (who may not be bound by the same religious considerations as Waqf Boards) might lead to decisions that indirectly undermine this protection. 

Effects on Waqf Properties

1.   Loss of Autonomy: By reducing the Waqf Boards’ power to determine property status and introducing non-Muslim members, the Bill weakens the community’s control over its religious and charitable assets. District Collectors, as government appointees, could prioritize state interests over Waqf claims, potentially leading to the loss of properties deemed "government land." 

2.   Documentation Challenges: India has approximately 8.7 lakh Waqf properties spanning over 9.4 lakh acres. Many lack formal deeds due to their historical nature (e.g., oral dedications from centuries past). The six-month deadline to register properties on a central portal could result in numerous Waqf assets losing their status if documentation is incomplete or contested. 

3.   Encroachment Risks: With "Waqf by user" removed and Tribunal powers curtailed, properties currently under litigation (over 13,000) or encroached upon (around 58,889) might face increased vulnerability. The shift to High Court appeals could prolong disputes, favoring parties with greater resources. 

4.   Historical Sites at Risk: Properties like mosques or dargahs recognized under the Places of Worship Act could face challenges if their Waqf status is questioned due to missing deeds, despite the 1991 Act’s protections. This creates a legal gray area where administrative decisions under the UMEED Bill might conflict with the Worship Act. 

Effects on the Muslim Community

1.   Erosion of Religious Autonomy: The inclusion of non-Muslims in Waqf governance and the removal of Muslim-specific expertise from Tribunals are seen by many as an intrusion into religious affairs, violating the community’s rights under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution (freedom to practice and manage religious affairs). Critics argue this contrasts with the management of Hindu temples or Sikh gurdwaras, where non-members of those faiths are not typically included. 

2.   Economic Impact: Waqf properties, valued at over Rs 1.2 lakh crore, support education, healthcare, and welfare for poor Muslims. Losing control or ownership could diminish these resources, disproportionately affecting marginalized sections of the community.  

3.   Communal Tensions: The Bill’s timing—amid a politically charged climate—and its perceived targeting of Muslim institutions could fuel distrust and polarization. Critics, including Muslim leaders and opposition parties, view it as part of a broader majoritarian agenda, potentially exacerbating social divides. 

4.   Legal and Administrative Burden: The shift to centralized registration and High Court appeals may overwhelm community members with legal costs and bureaucratic hurdles, especially for smaller Waqfs managed by mutawallis (custodians) with limited resources. 

Broader Context and Concerns

The Places of Worship Act was designed to preserve communal harmony by freezing the status of religious sites, but the UMEED Bill’s reforms could destabilize this balance for Waqf properties. While the government claims the Bill enhances efficiency and transparency (e.g., addressing corruption in Waqf Boards), opponents argue it facilitates state control over Muslim endowments, potentially aligning with historical precedents in countries like Turkey or Egypt, where Waqf properties were nationalized. 

For the Muslim community, the Bill raises existential questions about identity and agency. If Waqf properties—seen as sacred dedications to Allah—are stripped away or mismanaged, it could undermine a key pillar of Islamic charity and community welfare in India. The tension between the Worship Act’s intent and the UMEED Bill’s mechanisms underscores a critical debate: balancing administrative reform with religious freedom in a secular, pluralistic nation. 

In summary, while the UMEED Bill aims to modernize Waqf management, its interplay with the Places of Worship Act could jeopardize the security of Waqf properties, reducing the Muslim community’s control over its religious and charitable legacy. The outcome hinges on how these laws are interpreted and implemented, a process likely to spark legal battles and public contention.