The Madras High Court invalidated an amendment to Tamil Nadu’s Wakf Act. The amendment granted power to the state government to appoint a commissioner for the state’s Wakf Board. The court ruled that this power infringed upon Wakf properties’ protection under the Constitution. This decision has significant implications for Wakf administration in Tamil Nadu.
The Madras High Court recently invalidated the 2010 amendment made by the Tamil Nadu government to the 1995 Wakf Act, which is a Central legislation. A Bench comprising Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy struck down the clauses that empowered the Chief Executive Officer of the Tamil Nadu Wakf Board to issue eviction orders against encroachers.
The Bench noted,
“Parliament intended to establish efficient mechanisms for the recovery of possession … Consequently, the Central Act is designed as a comprehensive framework on the matter. As a result, the state legislation is in conflict with the Waqf Act of 1995.”
Read Also:Madras High Court Initiates Consultation on Reforming Judicial Vacations
The amendment passed under the assumption that it should be integrated with the Tamil Nadu Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act of 1976. However, the High Court ruled that only designated tribunals established according to federal law authorized to evict trespassers from Wakf properties. It clarified that state amendments could not supersede federal legislation.
The court’s reasoning emphasized that the 2010 amendment enacted under the powers granted by the Concurrent List, not the State List. This is significant because laws made under the Concurrent List, where both the state and the central government can legislate, require the President’s assent if there is any conflict with existing central legislation.
The amendments challenged in the Madras High Court on the grounds that they unconstitutional and encroached upon the rights of the Muslim community to manage their religious affairs. The petitioners argued that the amendments violated the principles of the Wakf Act, which is a central law, thereby overstepping the state’s jurisdiction.
Specifically, the court held that the amendments did not adhere to the required legal processes and infringed upon the rights that the original law intended to protect. As a result, the amendments declared unconstitutional, reaffirming the judiciary’s role in overseeing legislative procedures and ensuring that they conform to legal norms and constitutional principles.
Read Also:Madras High Court Criticizes Advocates Assisting in Forceful Property Seizures
The invalidation of the amendment by the Madras High Court is a significant setback for the Tamil Nadu government’s plans to reform Wakf property management. It reaffirms the supremacy of central law over state amendments in matters of religious trust property management. This decision seen as a victory for those advocating for the autonomy of religious communities in managing their affairs without excessive governmental interference.
The court found that the state amendment indeed in conflict with the central legislation, necessitating Presidential approval, which it did not have.
Thus, the state’s amendment could not be enforced as it stood.
Read Judgement: [Mohmood Hussain v. State of Tamil Nadu and ors]
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
