Thanks to what critics describe as keen appeasement and knee-jerk action, the DMK government has resulted in the staying of the functioning of the Waqf Board in Tamil Nadu. Recently, the Madras High Court restrained the State Waqf Board from exercising any powers and functions after noting that the mandate relating to the inclusion of two non-Muslim members on the Board had not been fulfilled. The Court also observed that there was no nomination of any Member of the State Bar Council, as mandated under the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act, 1995.
While hearing a petition filed by Y. Shoukath Ali Mohamed challenging the constitution of the Waqf Board on the ground that it was neither complete nor in accordance with the mandate of law under Section 14 of the Act, a First Bench comprising Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G. Arul Murugan, in their nine-page order dated January 8, stated: “Furthermore, the mandate of the second proviso that two of the total members of the Board appointed under sub-section (1), excluding ex-officio members, shall be non-Muslim has also not been fulfilled. Maybe, in future, while appointing one out of two members under Clause (d) and one under Clause (f), respondents may proceed to appoint two non-Muslims. The constitution of the Board as it exists today, prima facie, is not in accordance with the provisions of law.”
Counsel for the petitioner also drew the attention of the Court to the observations made by the Supreme Court in paragraphs 183 to 185 of the interim order in re: The Wakf Amendment Act, 2025.
On the other hand, the Advocate General submitted that the constitution of the Wakf Board was almost complete, as a majority of the members had already been nominated or appointed, and that steps were being taken to complete the remaining nominations.
Recording these submissions, the Bench observed that, from a bare reading of the provisions, it was crystal clear that to complete the constitution of the Board under Section 14 of the Act, there had to be at least two persons nominated under Clause (d) and one person nominated under Clause (f). However, it appeared that under Clause (d), only one person had been nominated, while there was no nomination of any Member of the State Bar Council under Clause (f). Further, the mandate of the second proviso requiring two non-Muslim members had also not been fulfilled. As a result, the constitution of the Board, as it stood, was held to be prima facie not in accordance with the law.
The Court held: “In view of the above, the (Waqf) Board cannot be allowed to exercise any powers and functions under the Act. The Board is hereby restrained from exercising any powers and functions. The Advocate General prays for a short time to file a reply and it may be filed before the next hearing. List the matter on 19.01.2026. It will be open for the respondents to apply for vacating the stay.”
Critics argue that the present state of affairs is the result of the DMK government’s urgency and focus on appeasement, particularly as the State heads towards Assembly elections in March. They contend that the government failed to apply its mind, as reflected in the haste with which the Board was constituted. For the DMK, critics allege, secularism appears to operate selectively, extended for one day to Muslims and Christians, given its approach towards the Tiruparankundram temple, other Hindu interests, and instances of temple demolitions.
This negligence, critics warn, may even result in the complete closure of the Waqf Board in Tamil Nadu, especially as courts may not entertain further leniency when the central government has already been given a final opportunity to upload details on the UMEED portal.
It is also recalled that Chief Minister M.K. Stalin, on December 23, announced that religious buildings that began functioning between 2019 and 2024 in adherence to the Tamil Nadu Combined Development and Building Rules, 2019, would be exempted from the requirement of obtaining a ‘No Objection Certificate’ (NOC) from the district collector for planning permission. Addressing Christmas celebrations organised by the DMK’s Minorities Welfare Wing in Chennai, he stated that this exemption would also apply to religious buildings that had applied for planning permission during the same period, following a request made by DMK MLA Inigo Irudhayaraj.
