SC declines to entertain plea against UMEED portal’s ‘classification’ of waqf properties; says there is ‘no dilution of rights’

Appearing for Ali, Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy said, “The problem is that under the Rules, they have reclassified how you abide and define yourself as a waqf. Previously, for hundreds of years, the system was Waqf by Survey. Now the portal does not allow that at all. It’s now Waqf by User only. So there is no drop-down.”

‘You chose not to take the advice’

Justice Bagchi pointed out that it was recorded in a meeting that Waqf by Survey is not a recognised category under the Waqf Act 1995, and all such properties should be registered as Waqf by User. “So they clarified that Waqf by Survey will be subsumed in the category Waqf by User. That cannot be a challenge or a glitch. It would be a challenge whether there can be further classification or not, the issue is it is not a difficult situation for your client to upload data under the Waqf by User category. You can always do it and then put in an objection that it is not Waqf by User.”

The judge added, “Your main thrust is that the portal is dysfunctional so far as your client is concerned and your client does not know how a Waqf by Survey is to be uploaded. On the other hand, your pleading shows that you have clearly indicated…put it up in Waqf by User category.”

Guruswamy said, “That’s the only option I have.”

Justice Bagchi said, “No, that’s the option you are advised. You choose not to take the advice.”

Question of more litigation is ‘authority’s headache’
The counsel said uploading under Waqf by User can lead to other problems as well. “Anyone can upload as Waqf by User and encroachers can also file as Waqf by User. This results in more litigation.”

Justice Bagchi, however, said, “That is the authority’s headache. You are here as a public interest litigant… You are a registered waqf. So you shouldn’t have any grievance or difficulty if you are classified with other waqf…”.

He pointed out that even before the recent amendments to the Waqf Act, registering was mandatory. “And you are a registered waqf. There is no dilution of rights by putting your case under Waqf by User,” the judge added.

Guruswamy said that under the new rules, all waqf properties have to be “re-registered” under the portal, to which Justice Bagchi said, “You don’t have to re-register, you only have to upload the data. There is a difference between the two.”

The counsel said that if not uploaded, consequences follow.

Justice Bagchi stated, “That is why even if you are a Waqf by Survey, when you are advised to put your data up by Waqf by User, you are in due compliance of the provisions of the Act. That by itself does not change your character. The waqf character is dependent on the registration and the deed through which you have been created. That uploading is just data entry.”

Ultimately, the bench said the petitioner should approach the prescribed authority under the Act for redressal of the grievance.