HYDERABAD: Advisor to the Telangana Government, Mohammed Ali Shabbir, personally attended the Supreme Court hearing in New Delhi on Wednesday in connection with the legal challenge to the Waqf Amendment Act. As one of the petitioners in the case, he welcomed the apex court’s critical observations supporting religious autonomy and minority rights.
Speaking to reporters after the hearing, Shabbir Ali said he was encouraged by the constitutional questions raised by the bench, especially the concerns over the inclusion of non-Muslims in Waqf institutions and the potential threat to long-standing Waqf properties.
“Today’s hearing has vindicated our stand. The court has clearly indicated that this law raises serious constitutional concerns. We are hopeful that the Supreme Court will grant a stay on the implementation of the Waqf Amendment Act,” he said.
Shabbir Ali described the Act as a direct assault on Muslim religious institutions and reaffirmed his resolve to challenge it through all available legal and democratic means. “This is not just a legal fight, it is a matter of safeguarding the constitutional rights of Muslims. Until this draconian law is repealed, we will not rest. We will continue our struggle in the courts, in Parliament, and among the people,” he declared.
The Supreme Court bench, headed by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and comprising Justices P.V. Sanjay Kumar and K.V. Viswanathan, heard over 100 petitions challenging the amended Waqf Act. The amendment, passed by Parliament on April 4 and given Presidential assent on April 8, has drawn widespread criticism from minority groups.
Mohammed Ali Shabbir is being represented by senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Salman Khurshid. Other senior counsels representing the petitioners included Rajeev Dhavan, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, and C.U. Singh.
During the hearing, the bench questioned the logic behind allowing non-Muslims on the Central Waqf Council and asked the Centre whether a similar inclusion would be acceptable in Hindu religious boards. The court also expressed concern over the delegation of quasi-judicial powers to District Magistrates to resolve Waqf property disputes and the challenges in documenting centuries-old mosques and religious structures established by long-standing usage.
The petitioners argued that the amendments violated Article 26 of the Constitution, which guarantees religious denominations the right to manage their own affairs.
The Solicitor General, appearing for the Centre, defended the amendments as efforts to improve transparency. However, the court stated it would consider issuing interim directions on two crucial issues: ensuring that only Muslims (excluding ex officio members) are included on Waqf Boards, and protecting by-user Waqf properties from any coercive action during the ongoing case.
The hearing is scheduled to resume on Thursday, April 17.
