The Kerala High Court criticized the Waqf Board for alleged land-grabbing tactics impacting hundreds of families, highlighting serious irregularities in property management and warning of strict judicial scrutiny against such misuse of trust lands.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
KERALA: In a landmark judgment, the Kerala High Court has ruled that the Kerala Waqf Board’s (KWB) 2019 decision to declare disputed property in Munambam as a waqf was “bad in law”. The Division Bench of Justices SA Dharmadhikari and Syam Kumar VM delivered the verdict while hearing the State government’s appeal against a single judge’s order that had earlier quashed the formation of an Inquiry Commission.
Background of the Case
The dispute concerns land in Munambam, originally measuring 404.76 acres, which has now been reduced to about 135.11 acres due to sea erosion. In 1950, Siddique Sait gifted the land to Farook College. However, portions of the land were already occupied by residents, who continued living there, and some later purchased parts of the land from the college.
The Kerala Waqf Board formally registered the land as waqf property in 2019, rendering prior sales allegedly void. This led to protests by around 600 families facing possible eviction. In response, the Kerala government appointed an Inquiry Commission in November 2024, headed by retired Justice CN Ramachandran Nair, to examine the rights of the families.
The appointment of the Commission was challenged by members of the Waqf Samrakshana Samithi, arguing that the government lacked the power to intervene in waqf matters. The Single Judge, Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, quashed the State’s decision, prompting the appeal.
Division Bench’s Findings
The Division Bench set aside the single-judge ruling, emphasizing several key points:
KWB’s Declaration Was Unreasonably Delayed
The Court observed that the KWB’s orders were issued after a “highly belated” period of nearly seven decades, violating statutory provisions:
“The action of the KWB of declaring/registering the subject property as a waqf property through its declarations and orders issued in September and October 2019 are bad in law on the grounds of being unreasonably delayed and having been issued in palpable violation of the provisions of the Waqf Acts 1954, 1984, and 1995 and resultantly non-enforceable.”
The 1950 Deed Was a Gift, Not a Waqf
The Court held that the original endowment deed did not intend to create a permanent dedication to God:
“The endowment deed of 1950 never intended to create any ‘permanent dedication in favour of the Almighty God’, but was simpliciter a gift deed in favour of R5 Farooq Management and therefore could have never qualified as a ‘waqf deed’ under any of the enactments of the Waqf Act 1954, 1984, or 1995.”
KWB’s Notification Was a Land-Grabbing Tactic
Highlighting the social impact, the Court strongly criticized the KWB:
“The notification dated 25.09.2019 notifying the subject property as waqf is ultra vires the provisions of The Waqf Act, 1954, as also The Central Waqf Act, 1995 and nothing less than a land grabbing tactic of KWB which has affected the bread and butter, livelihood of hundreds of families and bonafide occupants.”
State Not Bound by KWB’s Declaration
The Court clarified that the Kerala government retains the authority to constitute an Inquiry Commission:
“Whilst affirming the validity of the notification constituting the IC, we shall also be holding that the State Government is not bound by the waqf declaration/registration effected by KWB, being simply an eye wash to paint the subject property as a waqf property and Govt. possess widely conferred statutory powers to issue directions under Section 97 of the Waqf Act, 1995 post the conclusion of and submission of the report by the IC.”
Locus Standi of Petitioners Questioned
The Bench also noted procedural shortcomings, stating that the original petitioners lacked standing to challenge the government’s decision:
“The original writ petitioners do not possess the locus standi to have instituted the writ petition before the Single Bench, which clearly ought not to have been entertained at their instance.”
Case Title:
State of Kerala v. Kerala Waqf Samrakshana Vedhi
WA NO. 603 OF 2025
Read Judgment:
