Supreme Court to authorities: Will you allow Muslims in Hindu trusts? | India News

NEW DELHI:
SG stated there was no foundation for the apprehension of contemporary scrutiny of ‘waqf by user’ properties. It was meant to allow solely these Muslims who had already created a belief for charity, by assuring that their properties wouldn’t be handled as waqf property, he stated. CJI stated, “Before the British came to India, there was no concept of registering properties on transfer. How will someone produce documentary proof of a waqf if it was done during the 14th to 19th century. Jama Masjid in Delhi may be ‘waqf by user’. Who will produce documentary proof for this? But at the same time, no one can make an absurd claim that Parliament or Delhi HC land is waqf land.”
Mehta stated Muslim charity commissioners might enter temples and have been getting into temples. “The Tamil Nadu govt says it can appoint archaks (pujaris) and the court approves it saying it is a secular function of the govt,” he stated, including, “It is the administration of properties. Nothing to do with the religious affairs of Muslims.”
The bench stated so long as a non-Muslim was confined to the publish of ex-officio member, it was nice. “But as far as other members are concerned, it can’t be that out of 22 members in the council, only eight are Muslim,” the CJI stated.
The SG stated this challenge was raised earlier than the Joint Parliamentary Committee and it was emphatically clarified by the minister involved {that a} most of two out of twenty-two members could be non-Muslims in the council.
“The provisions are now inclusive as membership is expanded to include all categories of Muslims, which was earlier confined only to Shias and Sunnis. Among the members, two must be women, so it has become even more inclusive,” Mehta stated. The bench stated this was a optimistic improvement.
Mehta additionally allayed the SC’s apprehension of quick reconstitution of the council and boards by saying the present our bodies would proceed until their finish of tenure. He stated that curiously, among the many 150 petitioners, not a single board had approached the SC claiming that it was affected by the modifications in the waqf Act.
At one level, the SC mulled the choice of sending all petitions in the SC and earlier than HCs to one HC. But the Muslim aspect opposed it and stated the difficulty required adjudication on the earliest. The SG stated let the courtroom challenge discover to the Union govt, which might reply in element. However, when the SC meant to dictate an interim order, Mehta and Dwivedi efficiently opposed it by searching for to advance arguments.