The Madras High Court has decisively rejected the claim of a masjid in Tirunelveli district that sought control over 1,100 acres of land. The court ruled that the masjid is entitled only to 2.34 acres the exact extent granted in 1712 by the then ruler of Madurai Samasthanam through a copper plate inscription.
The verdict, delivered by Justice M Dhandapani, not only dismantles a blatant attempt to inflate a centuries-old religious endowment but also sheds light on how Waqf institutions have been systematically encroaching upon government and private lands by misusing historical grants.
The dispute traces back to a copper plate grant of 1712, issued by the Madurai Samasthanam, which clearly referred to 75 kottahs of land being granted to Kanmiya Pallivasal masjid at Kandiyaperi for religious purposes. Transcribed in 1925, the Telugu inscription unambiguously described the gift as a Sarva Manyam for Masjid Dharmam, a tax-free grant to be enjoyed by the masjid’s descendants “as long as the sun and moon last.”
Based on this grant, the entitlement of the masjid was upheld by the Tinnevelly Subordinate Court in 1955 and recorded in the Inam Fair Registers of 1865–66. Crucially, however, the original extent was limited to just 2.34 acres (each kottah measuring approximately 0.03124 acre).
Despite this, in 2011 the masjid approached the Waqf Tribunal at Tirunelveli, claiming that the grant entitled it to more than 1,100 acres across multiple survey numbers. In 2016, the tribunal shockingly ruled in favour of the masjid, effectively endorsing an astronomical expansion of the original grant.
The Tamil Nadu government challenged this order in 2018, arguing that the claim was not only baseless but also posed serious threats to agricultural livelihoods, land ownership, and state resources.
Additional Advocate General Veera Kathiravan, representing the State, pointed out that the lands listed by the masjid had already been declared ryotwari under the Tamil Nadu Inam Abolition Act, 1963. These lands had been redistributed to landless farmers in 1966, with 362 families currently cultivating them on the basis of pattas granted by the government. “The masjid’s claim is not just a clerical error it is an attempt to rewrite history and appropriate lands lawfully given to the poor,” the State argued.
Justice Dhandapani noted that the Survey and Boundaries Act, which standardized survey numbers, came into existence only in 1923. Therefore, the masjid had no valid explanation as to how its claim ballooned into thousands of survey numbers covering over 1,100 acres. While acknowledging the authenticity of the 1712 copper plate grant, the court made it clear that the entitlement extended only to 75 kottahs, i.e., 2.34 acres, and nothing more.
“Once a property is declared as Waqf, it remains so. But the extent of that Waqf cannot be artificially enlarged beyond what was originally granted,” the judge held, directing the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board to identify the correct 2.34 acres based on the description and boundaries in the inscription.
This case is not an isolated one. Across India, Waqf Boards have been staking claims over thousands of acres of land—often prime government or private property—by citing vague or inflated historical records. The Tirunelveli case illustrates how a small 18th-century grant can be turned into an attempt to control entire villages, displacing farmers and undermining state authority.
Critics argue that the unchecked powers of Waqf Boards, coupled with the lack of transparent land audits, have allowed such attempts to proliferate. In this instance, the High Court’s ruling not only prevented the dispossession of hundreds of farming families but also protected critical state resources from being handed over under dubious pretexts.
The judgment is likely to reignite calls for a comprehensive audit of Waqf properties across India. With nearly 8 lakh acres of land under Waqf control—making it the largest landowner after the Indian Railways the potential for misuse, encroachment, and illegal claims is enormous.
Legal experts suggest that the Tirunelveli verdict could set a precedent for curbing inflated Waqf claims in other states. By restricting entitlements strictly to what was originally granted, the High Court has drawn a clear boundary between legitimate religious endowments and opportunistic land grabs.
In concluding his verdict, Justice Dhandapani expressed appreciation for amicus curiae Chevanan Mohan, whose legal insights helped the court unravel the complexities of the case. “This court has been enlightened on all facets of law relating to the issue at hand, thereby enabling it to deliver a decision that upholds justice while curbing exaggerated claims,” the judge remarked.
