It’s A Legal Issue Not Religious
Published On : 2024-11-16T11:47:06+0530 [ IST ] |
Author : Mayur_Tembhare
Reading Time : mins
Home
Entertainment
None :
The leaders of both Christian and Muslim communities should do everything to avoid polarisation over the Munnambam waqf issue.
The concept of waqf has been around for centuries. It may be from the Mughal era but in India the regulation of waqf property started in the latter part of the 19th century. The Waqf Act of 1995 regulates waqf property in India.
The Waqf Amendment Bill2024 now under JPC requires a person to be a practicing Muslim for five years to dedicate a property to waqf. More interestingly the amendment allows non-Muslims to sit on the waqf board whereas a Muslim must qualify to waqf a
Waqf properties started to be regulated in the later part of the 19th century and waqf typically funded educational institutions, graveyards, mosques shelter homes and possessions for centuries. So, properties might not have proper registration documents.
The Bill changes this to the absolute authority of the district collector without following any hearing or enquiry and makes entries to the register. If a graveyard or mosque has been held as waqf property for centuries it hasSadqqu
If the district collector sought the registration document and waqf fails to provide official records even though it has been in possession for centuries the district collector could make entries to official records violating Article 26. Art 26 (1) allows the establishment and maintenance of religious institutions.
Section 40 of the Waqf Act places an onus on the board if it had ‘reason to believe’ that a property is a waqf property; if it is registered ‘under any other act’ then the board must hold an enquiry, ‘call the parties, depending on the circumstances’ statutorily obliged to conduct
It must be accepted that corruption exists in waqf property management. These corrupt officials should be prosecuted and punished if they misuse the properties instead of persecuting the whole Muslim community. It must also be accepted that the Act requires changes as society evolves but the Bill seemed to
The Munambamwaqf issue is neither a matter of the Act nor the Bill. The starting point for discussing it is a document that is nowhere to be found: the lease of the Travancore king by Mr Sait in 1902. An immediate disclosure of this document will settle the entire issue.
Why didn’t the Nissar Commission appointed by the VS Achuthanandan government in 2008 investigate this matter?
There were 12 terms of reference which the commission was asked to investigate. Even a cursory read makes it clear that the Munambam property was not included in these terms of reference but the commission extended its inquiry into the
The matter went to the high court which directed that the inquiry commission has jurisdiction to investigate it. This would expose the government’s political hypocrisy; the government wanted to inquire about what was taking place in the waqf board as stipulated in the terms of
Why did the state government not intervene when the matter was pending in the high court? They wanted to do something but did not have the political will regarding the terms of references and put the matter before the court
It is shocking to see why the commission did not extend its inquiry into the lease agreement between the Travancore king and Mr Sait. Everything was investigated but not Mr Sait’s legal ownership a legally relevant question to be answered to determine the legitimacy of the
Why was the government in a hurry to agree on this report without properly enquiring about the legality of the issue?
The entire waqf committee must be put in the dock; Section 40 of the Act states that when you have ‘reason to believe you must initiate an inquiry to serve notice’ to all parties ‘as the case may be’ but the board has miserably failed to comply with this legal obligation.
If it was true then call the parties and issue show cause why such property should not be registered and notice of the action proposed -- nothing to this effect seemed to have taken place. The waqf board has miserably failed to conduct an inquiry under Section 40 of the Act.
Why didn’t the government have a legal opinion before endorsing the commission report?
The state government is simply emulating the same tactics employed by the central government and is procrastinating to divide Christians and Muslims in Kerala on an issue which they invented to polarise the community.
The religious leaders of both Christians and Muslims should be very careful; if you fail to understand the tactics of communal polarisation and divide and rule, tutored by the British and not lead the communities in the right direction it would be disastrous.
Baiju Thittala originally from Kottayam is a solicitor of the Senior Courts of Englandand Wales as well as the Mayor of Cambridge. Disclaimer: The article reflects the writer’s personal views
Source : Reporters From Sunrise Chronicles
Tags : Commissionappointed , These , governmentletter …’ …‘ copy , Christians , Cambridge , Pallipuram , More , Waqf , Travancore , Everything ,
Summary :
The leaders of both Christian and Muslim communities should do everything to avoid polarisation over the Munnambam waqf issue.
The concept of waqf has been around for centuries. It may be fro
